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" ?
SC dismissed the appeal and rejected the Section 7 invocation, holding the appellant was not a financial creditor. The Court found the cumulative redeemable preference shares constituted share capital, not a loan, and dividends depend on profits; amounts paid on CRPS do not qualify as debt. Redemption had not become due because there were no profits, reserves or fresh-issue proceeds for redemption, so no default under Section 3(12) arose. The prior liability stood extinguished on issuance of CRPS, converting the relationship into that of a preference shareholder, and there was no commercial effect of borrowing. Consequently, the Section 7 application was unsustainable and the appeal was dismissed.
SC dismissed the appeal and rejected the Section 7 invocation, holding the appellant was not a financial creditor. The Court found the cumulative redeemable preference shares constituted share capital, not a loan, and dividends depend on profits; amounts paid on CRPS do not qualify as debt. Redemption had not become due because there were no profits, reserves or fresh-issue proceeds for redemption, so no default under Section 3(12) arose. The prior liability stood extinguished on issuance of CRPS, converting the relationship into that of a preference shareholder, and there was no commercial effect of borrowing. Consequently, the Section 7 application was unsustainable and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
