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" ?
HC held that petitioner, as purchaser of corporate debtor's assets in liquidation, was not liable to pay previous owner's outstanding electricity dues directly to electricity distribution company. Court relied on Supreme Court precedent establishing that statutory dues to government entities must be treated separately from secured creditor claims and paid through IBC waterfall mechanism under Section 53. Electricity Act 2003 provisions do not override IBC due to Section 238's overriding effect. Respondents' demand for payment of previous owner's arrears was unjustified. HC directed respondents to refund Rs. 55,29,000 to petitioner with 6% interest from payment date, increasing to 12% if not paid within two months, and release remaining bank guarantee. Petition allowed.
HC held that petitioner, as purchaser of corporate debtor's assets in liquidation, was not liable to pay previous owner's outstanding electricity dues directly to electricity distribution company. Court relied on Supreme Court precedent establishing that statutory dues to government entities must be treated separately from secured creditor claims and paid through IBC waterfall mechanism under Section 53. Electricity Act 2003 provisions do not override IBC due to Section 238's overriding effect. Respondents' demand for payment of previous owner's arrears was unjustified. HC directed respondents to refund Rs. 55,29,000 to petitioner with 6% interest from payment date, increasing to 12% if not paid within two months, and release remaining bank guarantee. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.