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 held that a Section 13(2) SARFAESI Act notice constituting a clear demand for Rs. 28,56,64,336.06/- against a personal guarantor effectively invokes the guarantee agreement. The tribunal determined that when a demand notice requests the guarantor to discharge liabilities within a specified timeframe, the personal guarantee stands legally invoked. The court rejected the lower adjudicating authority's finding that the application was premature, emphasizing that the notice's words and intent are critical in determining guarantee invocation. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the earlier order rejecting the Section 94(1) application and recognizing the validity of the bank's demand notice as a legitimate cause of action for initiating insolvency proceedings.
NCLAT held that a Section 13(2) SARFAESI Act notice constituting a clear demand for Rs. 28,56,64,336.06/- against a personal guarantor effectively invokes the guarantee agreement. The tribunal determined that when a demand notice requests the guarantor to discharge liabilities within a specified timeframe, the personal guarantee stands legally invoked. The court rejected the lower adjudicating authority's finding that the application was premature, emphasizing that the notice's words and intent are critical in determining guarantee invocation. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the earlier order rejecting the Section 94(1) application and recognizing the validity of the bank's demand notice as a legitimate cause of action for initiating insolvency proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
