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" ?
NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned admission under Section 9 and held the application liable to be rejected because a pre-existing bona fide dispute existed between the Operational Creditor (OC) and the Corporate Debtor (CD). Applying the Mobilox principle, the Tribunal found the dispute over alleged deficiency of services and invoice liability was plausible and supported by contemporaneous correspondence and a notice of dispute, not a patently feeble or sham plea. The Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the Section 9 petition and in treating the CD's ledger balance as decisive; in view of Section 9(5)(2)(d) the petition ought to have been rejected.
NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned admission under Section 9 and held the application liable to be rejected because a pre-existing bona fide dispute existed between the Operational Creditor (OC) and the Corporate Debtor (CD). Applying the Mobilox principle, the Tribunal found the dispute over alleged deficiency of services and invoice liability was plausible and supported by contemporaneous correspondence and a notice of dispute, not a patently feeble or sham plea. The Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the Section 9 petition and in treating the CD's ledger balance as decisive; in view of Section 9(5)(2)(d) the petition ought to have been rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.