Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
