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 upheld the Adjudicating Authority's order under Section 66(2) IBC, holding that the suspended directors had authorised encashment of cheques during the Section 14 moratorium using post-CIRP credits, without any underlying liability or commercial justification. This conduct amounted to wrongful trading, reflecting failure to exercise due diligence to minimise creditor losses, thereby satisfying Section 66(2). The Tribunal rejected reliance on Sections 95 and 96 IBC, clarifying that the interim moratorium does not bar proceedings or orders under Section 66 against suspended directors. Finding no infirmity in the impugned order, NCLAT held the appeal by suspended directors not maintainable and dismissed it, sustaining the direction to jointly and severally refund Rs. 91,00,000/- to the corporate debtor.
NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's order under Section 66(2) IBC, holding that the suspended directors had authorised encashment of cheques during the Section 14 moratorium using post-CIRP credits, without any underlying liability or commercial justification. This conduct amounted to wrongful trading, reflecting failure to exercise due diligence to minimise creditor losses, thereby satisfying Section 66(2). The Tribunal rejected reliance on Sections 95 and 96 IBC, clarifying that the interim moratorium does not bar proceedings or orders under Section 66 against suspended directors. Finding no infirmity in the impugned order, NCLAT held the appeal by suspended directors not maintainable and dismissed it, sustaining the direction to jointly and severally refund Rs. 91,00,000/- to the corporate debtor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.