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" ?
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.