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 order of the Adjudicating Authority directing valuation of intangible assets and rejecting the appellant's revised resolution plan. The appellant's initial resolution plan was approved, but upon an application by an unsecured creditor, the Adjudicating Authority ordered revaluation of intangible assets and reconsideration by the CoC. The appellant's revised plan was rejected by the CoC, and the Adjudicating Authority rightly dismissed the appellant's application as infructuous, directing issuance of fresh Form G. The NCLAT held that the intangible assets must be valued separately, and the CoC's commercial wisdom in rejecting the revised offer was a legitimate exercise of discretion. The appeal was dismissed.
The NCLAT upheld the order of the Adjudicating Authority directing valuation of intangible assets and rejecting the appellant's revised resolution plan. The appellant's initial resolution plan was approved, but upon an application by an unsecured creditor, the Adjudicating Authority ordered revaluation of intangible assets and reconsideration by the CoC. The appellant's revised plan was rejected by the CoC, and the Adjudicating Authority rightly dismissed the appellant's application as infructuous, directing issuance of fresh Form G. The NCLAT held that the intangible assets must be valued separately, and the CoC's commercial wisdom in rejecting the revised offer was a legitimate exercise of discretion. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
