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 during an interim moratorium under Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, no additional financial creditor can initiate fresh proceedings against a personal guarantor when legal actions are already underway. The Appellate Tribunal confined its review to the specific grounds presented, finding no apparent error in the lower tribunal's order rejecting subsequent applications. The tribunal emphasized that once proceedings under Section 95 are initiated with an interim moratorium, other creditors are precluded from filing parallel applications. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lacking substantive merit, with a recommendation to expedite the existing insolvency proceedings.
NCLAT held that during an interim moratorium under Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, no additional financial creditor can initiate fresh proceedings against a personal guarantor when legal actions are already underway. The Appellate Tribunal confined its review to the specific grounds presented, finding no apparent error in the lower tribunal's order rejecting subsequent applications. The tribunal emphasized that once proceedings under Section 95 are initiated with an interim moratorium, other creditors are precluded from filing parallel applications. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lacking substantive merit, with a recommendation to expedite the existing insolvency proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.