Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
NCLAT held that operational debt interest claims require explicit contractual agreement. The tribunal rejected the operational creditor's interest component in the Section 9 Application due to absence of specific contractual provisions. The Code's deliberate exclusion of interest from operational debt definition mandates that interest cannot be unilaterally imposed without mutual consent. The principal amount was ordered to be released to the respondent, effectively allowing the appeal while dismissing the interest claim. The tribunal emphasized that initiating corporate insolvency resolution process would not serve the Code's objective of maximizing debtor's asset value. Appeal was consequently allowed with the principal amount being released.
NCLAT held that operational debt interest claims require explicit contractual agreement. The tribunal rejected the operational creditor's interest component in the Section 9 Application due to absence of specific contractual provisions. The Code's deliberate exclusion of interest from operational debt definition mandates that interest cannot be unilaterally imposed without mutual consent. The principal amount was ordered to be released to the respondent, effectively allowing the appeal while dismissing the interest claim. The tribunal emphasized that initiating corporate insolvency resolution process would not serve the Code's objective of maximizing debtor's asset value. Appeal was consequently allowed with the principal amount being released.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.