Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
NCLAT dismissed appeal concerning classification of security deposit as financial debt under IBC. Appellant transferred Rs. 2,37,61,440/- to Corporate Debtor under MoU for premises handover. Though money was disbursed, transaction lacked essential elements of financial debt under Section 5(8). Security deposit was not disbursed for time value of money as no interest accrued from disbursement date. Interest clause in MoU was purely penal, triggered only upon breach/termination. Clause 8.5 explicitly established deposit's purpose as security rather than mobilization advance for construction. Transaction's nature being security deposit without commercial borrowing characteristics disqualified it as financial debt under Code.
NCLAT dismissed appeal concerning classification of security deposit as financial debt under IBC. Appellant transferred Rs. 2,37,61,440/- to Corporate Debtor under MoU for premises handover. Though money was disbursed, transaction lacked essential elements of financial debt under Section 5(8). Security deposit was not disbursed for time value of money as no interest accrued from disbursement date. Interest clause in MoU was purely penal, triggered only upon breach/termination. Clause 8.5 explicitly established deposit's purpose as security rather than mobilization advance for construction. Transaction's nature being security deposit without commercial borrowing characteristics disqualified it as financial debt under Code.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.