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 appeal involving a property transfer dispute between a corporate debtor and a sole proprietorship firm. The Appellate Tribunal held that the subject property was lawfully in possession of the Resolution Professional during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). A Take Over Agreement dated 16.12.2016 demonstrated the appellant's intention to transfer the property's ownership to the corporate debtor. The Resolution Plan, approved with 80.43% voting share, further validated the property's status. The tribunal concluded that the Resolution Professional had legitimate power to possess the property, and the appellant cannot reclaim possession after voluntarily agreeing to transfer the asset. The appeal was consequently dismissed.
NCLAT dismissed the appeal involving a property transfer dispute between a corporate debtor and a sole proprietorship firm. The Appellate Tribunal held that the subject property was lawfully in possession of the Resolution Professional during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). A Take Over Agreement dated 16.12.2016 demonstrated the appellant's intention to transfer the property's ownership to the corporate debtor. The Resolution Plan, approved with 80.43% voting share, further validated the property's status. The tribunal concluded that the Resolution Professional had legitimate power to possess the property, and the appellant cannot reclaim possession after voluntarily agreeing to transfer the asset. The appeal was consequently dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
