Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
581 to 600 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, holding that the insolvency resolution application against the personal guarantor was filed within the prescribed limitation period. The tribunal emphasized that the OTS proposal, though not submitted before the Adjudicating Authority, was a material acknowledgment of debt extending the limitation period. The letter dated 19.03.2018 by the appellant as director acknowledged the debt and the failure of the restructuring agreement, thereby reviving limitation. The limitation period commenced from the expiry of the 60-day notice under Section 13(2) and was extended by the acknowledgment letter, making the application served on 10.05.2022 timely. The appeal lacked merit and was accordingly dismissed.
The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, holding that the insolvency resolution application against the personal guarantor was filed within the prescribed limitation period. The tribunal emphasized that the OTS proposal, though not submitted before the Adjudicating Authority, was a material acknowledgment of debt extending the limitation period. The letter dated 19.03.2018 by the appellant as director acknowledged the debt and the failure of the restructuring agreement, thereby reviving limitation. The limitation period commenced from the expiry of the 60-day notice under Section 13(2) and was extended by the acknowledgment letter, making the application served on 10.05.2022 timely. The appeal lacked merit and was accordingly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.