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 the Adjudicating Authority could cancel a leave and license agreement and usage deed under IBC provisions despite the application lacking specific pleadings invoking Sections 45/46/49. Applying the requirement of section-wise material pleadings for avoidance relief, it was held that Section 49 could not be invoked on a bare Section 66/67 application. However, the agreements were treated as non-est and unenforceable because they were executed after a SARFAESI Section 13(13) restraint, statutorily prohibiting transfer/lease of secured assets; additionally, they were found to have been executed with intent to defraud creditors, justifying contribution under Section 66, including refund of sale proceeds received. Appeal dismissed. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether the Adjudicating Authority could cancel a leave and license agreement and usage deed under IBC provisions despite the application lacking specific pleadings invoking Sections 45/46/49. Applying the requirement of section-wise material pleadings for avoidance relief, it was held that Section 49 could not be invoked on a bare Section 66/67 application. However, the agreements were treated as non-est and unenforceable because they were executed after a SARFAESI Section 13(13) restraint, statutorily prohibiting transfer/lease of secured assets; additionally, they were found to have been executed with intent to defraud creditors, justifying contribution under Section 66, including refund of sale proceeds received. Appeal dismissed. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
