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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 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, holding that the Adjudicating Authority violated Section 27 IBC and principles of natural justice by ordering replacement of the Resolution Professional (RP) without first placing the agenda before the CoC and without affording the RP an opportunity of hearing. While recognising that an application under Section 60(5) IBC seeking RP's replacement is maintainable, NCLAT held that the statutory procedure under Section 27 and audi alteram partem must be followed. The impugned order was set aside to the limited extent of this procedural defect, and the Adjudicating Authority was directed to formulate an agenda for RP's replacement and place it before the CoC for consideration in accordance with Section 27(2) IBC.
NCLAT allowed the appeal, holding that the Adjudicating Authority violated Section 27 IBC and principles of natural justice by ordering replacement of the Resolution Professional (RP) without first placing the agenda before the CoC and without affording the RP an opportunity of hearing. While recognising that an application under Section 60(5) IBC seeking RP's replacement is maintainable, NCLAT held that the statutory procedure under Section 27 and audi alteram partem must be followed. The impugned order was set aside to the limited extent of this procedural defect, and the Adjudicating Authority was directed to formulate an agenda for RP's replacement and place it before the CoC for consideration in accordance with Section 27(2) IBC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
