Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
NCLAT upheld dismissal of a Section 9 petition due to lack of privity of contract between the Appellant and Respondent-MB Power. The Tribunal noted that invoices were raised against Hindustan Thermal-EPC, not the Respondent, and payments were received from Hindustan Thermal-EPC. The Appellant's decision to pursue proceedings against Respondent-MB Power appeared to be an afterthought. The Tribunal concurred with the Adjudicating Authority that merely because Respondent tried to reconcile between parties or signed work completion as project owner did not establish debtor-creditor relationship. Additionally, a pre-existing dispute existed between Appellant and Hindustan Thermal-EPC. The appeal was dismissed as the Section 9 application was not maintainable absent a debtor-creditor relationship.
NCLAT upheld dismissal of a Section 9 petition due to lack of privity of contract between the Appellant and Respondent-MB Power. The Tribunal noted that invoices were raised against Hindustan Thermal-EPC, not the Respondent, and payments were received from Hindustan Thermal-EPC. The Appellant's decision to pursue proceedings against Respondent-MB Power appeared to be an afterthought. The Tribunal concurred with the Adjudicating Authority that merely because Respondent tried to reconcile between parties or signed work completion as project owner did not establish debtor-creditor relationship. Additionally, a pre-existing dispute existed between Appellant and Hindustan Thermal-EPC. The appeal was dismissed as the Section 9 application was not maintainable absent a debtor-creditor relationship.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
