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 NCLAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that dismissed the Section 7 application for initiation of CIRP. The Tribunal held that the date of default under the corporate guarantee was not confined to the initial invocation within the Section 10A prohibited period, as the guarantee was a continuing, irrevocable, on-demand guarantee under Section 129 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Multiple successive invocations were permissible, and the second invocation, made after the Section 10A period, was based on an updated computation of dues, including additional liabilities. Since the default persisted beyond the exclusion period and the debt remained unpaid, the Section 7 application filed thereafter was maintainable.
The NCLAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order that dismissed the Section 7 application for initiation of CIRP. The Tribunal held that the date of default under the corporate guarantee was not confined to the initial invocation within the Section 10A prohibited period, as the guarantee was a continuing, irrevocable, on-demand guarantee under Section 129 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Multiple successive invocations were permissible, and the second invocation, made after the Section 10A period, was based on an updated computation of dues, including additional liabilities. Since the default persisted beyond the exclusion period and the debt remained unpaid, the Section 7 application filed thereafter was maintainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
