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" ?
Whether the approved resolution plan was liable to be rejected for alleged non-compliance with s.29A(g) IBC turned on the time at which ineligibility must be assessed. Applying the principle that disqualification of a successful resolution applicant is to be tested as on the date of submission of the resolution plan, and relying on the resolution professional's confirmation and independent professional certifications showing no ineligibility on that date, the finding that the plan was non-compliant with s.29A(g) was set aside. The plan was remitted for fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority within a stipulated time, and the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
Whether the approved resolution plan was liable to be rejected for alleged non-compliance with s.29A(g) IBC turned on the time at which ineligibility must be assessed. Applying the principle that disqualification of a successful resolution applicant is to be tested as on the date of submission of the resolution plan, and relying on the resolution professional's confirmation and independent professional certifications showing no ineligibility on that date, the finding that the plan was non-compliant with s.29A(g) was set aside. The plan was remitted for fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority within a stipulated time, and the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.