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...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
81 to 100 of 96510 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 20.08.2024 to 28.05.2025 should be excluded from the CIRP timeline as a period during which the process could not effectively progress due to directions of the Adjudicating Authority. The tribunal held that CoC decision-making was restrained pending claim verification, and even where voting was permitted, implementation required prior leave, materially impeding CIRP progress; further, disputes and changes regarding the resolution professional also disrupted the process. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to grant exclusion of this 281-day period, while affirming the exclusion already granted for the other period; the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether 20.08.2024 to 28.05.2025 should be excluded from the CIRP timeline as a period during which the process could not effectively progress due to directions of the Adjudicating Authority. The tribunal held that CoC decision-making was restrained pending claim verification, and even where voting was permitted, implementation required prior leave, materially impeding CIRP progress; further, disputes and changes regarding the resolution professional also disrupted the process. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to grant exclusion of this 281-day period, while affirming the exclusion already granted for the other period; the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.