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...
HC dealt with a writ petition alleging failure of respondent no. 2 to comply with Rule 28 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 regarding removal of defects within seven days. Respondent no. 1 admitted that re-filing of the company petition was permitted beyond the statutory period, while the petitioner acknowledged a 612-day delay in re-filing. HC recorded that the Registry's acceptance of delayed re-filing was due to procedural/system-generated permissions. HC directed respondent no. 1 to strictly adhere to the SOP consistent with Rules 28 and 63 henceforth. HC left it to the Adjudicating Authority to determine whether sufficient cause exists for condoning the delay in removing defects in the present case and disposed of the petition.
HC dealt with a writ petition alleging failure of respondent no. 2 to comply with Rule 28 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 regarding removal of defects within seven days. Respondent no. 1 admitted that re-filing of the company petition was permitted beyond the statutory period, while the petitioner acknowledged a 612-day delay in re-filing. HC recorded that the Registry's acceptance of delayed re-filing was due to procedural/system-generated permissions. HC directed respondent no. 1 to strictly adhere to the SOP consistent with Rules 28 and 63 henceforth. HC left it to the Adjudicating Authority to determine whether sufficient cause exists for condoning the delay in removing defects in the present case and disposed of the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
