Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
NCLAT dismissed the corporate debtor's appeal against admission of a Section 7 application filed by Punjab & Sind Bank. Despite the appellant submitting three settlement plans with different investors, all financial creditors (Punjab & Sind Bank, Bank of Maharashtra, and Punjab National Bank) unanimously rejected these proposals. YEIDA, claiming 751 crores, also opposed settlement. The Tribunal found that given the corporate debtor's substantial liabilities and opposition from homebuyers' associations, resolution through the statutory IBC framework was appropriate rather than settlement. The NCLAT confirmed the Section 7 application was filed within limitation by a duly authorized person and excluded the period from 29.07.2024 until judgment from the CIRP timeline.
NCLAT dismissed the corporate debtor's appeal against admission of a Section 7 application filed by Punjab & Sind Bank. Despite the appellant submitting three settlement plans with different investors, all financial creditors (Punjab & Sind Bank, Bank of Maharashtra, and Punjab National Bank) unanimously rejected these proposals. YEIDA, claiming 751 crores, also opposed settlement. The Tribunal found that given the corporate debtor's substantial liabilities and opposition from homebuyers' associations, resolution through the statutory IBC framework was appropriate rather than settlement. The NCLAT confirmed the Section 7 application was filed within limitation by a duly authorized person and excluded the period from 29.07.2024 until judgment from the CIRP timeline.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
