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" ?
The NCLAT upheld the rejection of the appellant's claim to be recognized as a financial creditor, affirming that the appellant's payments were either brokerage fees or adjustments against flat bookings rather than disbursements constituting financial debt. The appellant had only deposited Rs. 2,00,000 towards a flat booking which was later cancelled, and no actual payment was made for the flats allotted under the Builder Buyer Agreement. The appellant's prior status as an operational creditor remained unchanged throughout the CIRP. The tribunal found no error in the IRP's or Adjudicating Authority's decision, as the appellant failed to demonstrate any financial debt or lending arrangement. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed, confirming that the appellant cannot be treated as a financial creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The NCLAT upheld the rejection of the appellant's claim to be recognized as a financial creditor, affirming that the appellant's payments were either brokerage fees or adjustments against flat bookings rather than disbursements constituting financial debt. The appellant had only deposited Rs. 2,00,000 towards a flat booking which was later cancelled, and no actual payment was made for the flats allotted under the Builder Buyer Agreement. The appellant's prior status as an operational creditor remained unchanged throughout the CIRP. The tribunal found no error in the IRP's or Adjudicating Authority's decision, as the appellant failed to demonstrate any financial debt or lending arrangement. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed, confirming that the appellant cannot be treated as a financial creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
