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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
