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...
The Adjudicating Authority retained jurisdiction to decide the pending application for recovery of corporate debtor's assets even after approval of the resolution plan, since the application had been filed and contested prior to plan approval and was validly continued by substitution of the successful resolution applicant/corporate debtor; the jurisdictional objection was rejected. The Authority also had jurisdiction under Section 60(5) IBC to examine the MoU and related rights; the unregistered MoU, premised on disputed cash payments and surrounded by credibility concerns, was not an agreement to sell and could not confer protection under Section 53A TPA, rendering the appellant an unauthorised occupant; eviction and handover were upheld. Usage charges were sustained, payable upon proper determination. - NCLAT
The Adjudicating Authority retained jurisdiction to decide the pending application for recovery of corporate debtor's assets even after approval of the resolution plan, since the application had been filed and contested prior to plan approval and was validly continued by substitution of the successful resolution applicant/corporate debtor; the jurisdictional objection was rejected. The Authority also had jurisdiction under Section 60(5) IBC to examine the MoU and related rights; the unregistered MoU, premised on disputed cash payments and surrounded by credibility concerns, was not an agreement to sell and could not confer protection under Section 53A TPA, rendering the appellant an unauthorised occupant; eviction and handover were upheld. Usage charges were sustained, payable upon proper determination. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
