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...
NCLAT affirmed the impugned order and dismissed the appeal, holding that the Resolution Professional was lawfully entitled to take custody of share certificates and related documents of Subsidiary A and Subsidiary B as assets of the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal held that under s.25(2)(a) and s.18(1)(f)(v) of the Code the RP must assume control of assets over which the Corporate Debtor retains ownership rights, even if held by third parties, and that the Appellant, having failed to prove payment of consideration or lawful entitlement, could not retain possession. The Adjudicating Authority possessed jurisdiction under ss.60(5), 63, 231 and 238 to grant the reliefs sought; appeal rejected.
NCLAT affirmed the impugned order and dismissed the appeal, holding that the Resolution Professional was lawfully entitled to take custody of share certificates and related documents of Subsidiary A and Subsidiary B as assets of the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal held that under s.25(2)(a) and s.18(1)(f)(v) of the Code the RP must assume control of assets over which the Corporate Debtor retains ownership rights, even if held by third parties, and that the Appellant, having failed to prove payment of consideration or lawful entitlement, could not retain possession. The Adjudicating Authority possessed jurisdiction under ss.60(5), 63, 231 and 238 to grant the reliefs sought; appeal rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
