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...
The HC issued mandamus directing respondent electricity board to reconnect H.T. services to petitioner's Unit III within one month of completing technical formalities. Petitioner, a successful resolution applicant under an approved CIRP resolution plan, had remitted 1% of admitted statutory dues (Rs.7,74,780/- against Rs.7,74,78,027/-) as stipulated by NCLT order dated 06.12.2021. The court held that respondent's demand for pre-CIRP arrears through order dated 24.09.2024 was impermissible, violating the finality of the resolution plan approved under IBC 2016. Relying on Gyansham Mishra and Tata Power precedents, the court ruled that successful resolution applicants cannot be compelled to pay amounts exceeding those specified in NCLT-approved resolution plans, as respondent had participated in the resolution process and accepted the settlement terms.
The HC issued mandamus directing respondent electricity board to reconnect H.T. services to petitioner's Unit III within one month of completing technical formalities. Petitioner, a successful resolution applicant under an approved CIRP resolution plan, had remitted 1% of admitted statutory dues (Rs.7,74,780/- against Rs.7,74,78,027/-) as stipulated by NCLT order dated 06.12.2021. The court held that respondent's demand for pre-CIRP arrears through order dated 24.09.2024 was impermissible, violating the finality of the resolution plan approved under IBC 2016. Relying on Gyansham Mishra and Tata Power precedents, the court ruled that successful resolution applicants cannot be compelled to pay amounts exceeding those specified in NCLT-approved resolution plans, as respondent had participated in the resolution process and accepted the settlement terms.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
