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 Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) allowed the appeal and held that the adjudicating authority (NCLT) erred in rejecting the appellant's claim. The appellant had timely submitted proof of claim within the prescribed filing period under the CIRP of the principal corporate debtor; the IRP/RP is statutorily obliged to receive, collate and verify claims under ss.18 and 25(2)(e) of the IBC and to apply binding judicial precedent. The RP's legal interpretation and consequent omission to admit the claim materially affected the resolution process. As the resolution plan remains unapproved, the matter is remitted for reconsideration consistent with law and the duty of the RP to admit valid claims.
The Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) allowed the appeal and held that the adjudicating authority (NCLT) erred in rejecting the appellant's claim. The appellant had timely submitted proof of claim within the prescribed filing period under the CIRP of the principal corporate debtor; the IRP/RP is statutorily obliged to receive, collate and verify claims under ss.18 and 25(2)(e) of the IBC and to apply binding judicial precedent. The RP's legal interpretation and consequent omission to admit the claim materially affected the resolution process. As the resolution plan remains unapproved, the matter is remitted for reconsideration consistent with law and the duty of the RP to admit valid claims.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.