Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of the appellant's prayer to recall the admission order. Regarding withdrawal of CIRP u/s 12A of the IBC, the NCLAT held that since the Section 7 application was filed by respondents 6-9, and not by the applicants who initiated it, compliance with Section 12A read with Regulation 30A cannot be made, and withdrawal u/s 12A is not permissible. However, the NCLAT observed that if the Adjudicating Authority concludes that the ingredients of Section 65 are attracted (application filed with fraudulent/malicious intent), it can exercise its inherent jurisdiction to close the CIRP proceedings. Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in SBI vs. Consortium of Murari Lal Jalan & Florian Fritsch, the NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority can exercise inherent powers in appropriate cases. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of.
The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of the appellant's prayer to recall the admission order. Regarding withdrawal of CIRP u/s 12A of the IBC, the NCLAT held that since the Section 7 application was filed by respondents 6-9, and not by the applicants who initiated it, compliance with Section 12A read with Regulation 30A cannot be made, and withdrawal u/s 12A is not permissible. However, the NCLAT observed that if the Adjudicating Authority concludes that the ingredients of Section 65 are attracted (application filed with fraudulent/malicious intent), it can exercise its inherent jurisdiction to close the CIRP proceedings. Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in SBI vs. Consortium of Murari Lal Jalan & Florian Fritsch, the NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority can exercise inherent powers in appropriate cases. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
