Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Employee conflict disclosures and investment restrictions expand with new recusal duties, post-employment limits, and compliance reporting requirement...
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.