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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
The NCLAT allowed the appeal and set aside the Adjudicating Authority's finding that Clause 33 capped the guarantor's entire liability at Rs.25 crore. The Tribunal held that Clause 33, interpreted by its plain contractual terms, limits only the principal guarantee quantum to Rs.25 crore; the guarantor remains separately liable for default interest arising from delayed discharge of guarantee obligations. The appellant's claim exceeding Rs.25 crore was not held to contravene Clause 33, and the Adjudicating Authority erred in conflating discharge of the principal borrower's liability with the guarantor's obligation to pay default interest. The impugned directions are quashed and the appeal is allowed.
The NCLAT allowed the appeal and set aside the Adjudicating Authority's finding that Clause 33 capped the guarantor's entire liability at Rs.25 crore. The Tribunal held that Clause 33, interpreted by its plain contractual terms, limits only the principal guarantee quantum to Rs.25 crore; the guarantor remains separately liable for default interest arising from delayed discharge of guarantee obligations. The appellant's claim exceeding Rs.25 crore was not held to contravene Clause 33, and the Adjudicating Authority erred in conflating discharge of the principal borrower's liability with the guarantor's obligation to pay default interest. The impugned directions are quashed and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
