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...
SC upheld the termination of the Development and Supplementary Agreements by Respondent No.1 Society as lawful, effective and based on prolonged contractual defaults unrelated to insolvency. It held that the developer only had a limited licence, with no proprietary or transferable interest in the land; hence no "asset" or "property" of the corporate debtor subsisted on the second CIRP commencement date, and Section 14 IBC moratorium could not revive or protect extinguished contractual rights. NCLT lacked jurisdiction under Section 60(5)(c) IBC to interfere with such termination. SC further held that HC rightly exercised writ jurisdiction to direct processing of approvals for Respondent No.8 and that no violation of natural justice occurred. The appeal was dismissed.
SC upheld the termination of the Development and Supplementary Agreements by Respondent No.1 Society as lawful, effective and based on prolonged contractual defaults unrelated to insolvency. It held that the developer only had a limited licence, with no proprietary or transferable interest in the land; hence no "asset" or "property" of the corporate debtor subsisted on the second CIRP commencement date, and Section 14 IBC moratorium could not revive or protect extinguished contractual rights. NCLT lacked jurisdiction under Section 60(5)(c) IBC to interfere with such termination. SC further held that HC rightly exercised writ jurisdiction to direct processing of approvals for Respondent No.8 and that no violation of natural justice occurred. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
