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" ?
The dominant issue was whether an assignee financial creditor was disqualified from CoC membership and voting as a "related party" under Section 21(2) read with Section 5(24) of the IBC. Applying Phoenix ARC, the tribunal held the related-party disability operates in praesenti and attaches to the creditor, not to the debt; an assignment in good faith to an independent third party does not attract disqualification unless it is a mala fide device to circumvent Section 21(2). As the assignee ARC had no common shareholding or directors with the corporate debtor or the alleged related creditor, it was held not to be a related party and entitled to CoC participation with proportionate voting rights; prior orders were modified accordingly and resolution plans were to be considered by the reconstituted CoC - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether an assignee financial creditor was disqualified from CoC membership and voting as a "related party" under Section 21(2) read with Section 5(24) of the IBC. Applying Phoenix ARC, the tribunal held the related-party disability operates in praesenti and attaches to the creditor, not to the debt; an assignment in good faith to an independent third party does not attract disqualification unless it is a mala fide device to circumvent Section 21(2). As the assignee ARC had no common shareholding or directors with the corporate debtor or the alleged related creditor, it was held not to be a related party and entitled to CoC participation with proportionate voting rights; prior orders were modified accordingly and resolution plans were to be considered by the reconstituted CoC - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
