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 dominant issue was whether an operational creditor's Section 9 application was barred by Section 10A because the defaults pertained to invoices allegedly falling within the excluded period. The tribunal held that the dates of default for two invoices relating to one project arose beyond the Section 10A prohibited period; hence, dismissal solely on Section 10A was legally untenable. As the debt under these two invoices exceeded the Section 4 threshold of Rs 1 crore, the adjudicating authority was required to consider them on merits. The impugned dismissal was set aside, the Section 9 application was restored, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration limited to those invoices - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether an operational creditor's Section 9 application was barred by Section 10A because the defaults pertained to invoices allegedly falling within the excluded period. The tribunal held that the dates of default for two invoices relating to one project arose beyond the Section 10A prohibited period; hence, dismissal solely on Section 10A was legally untenable. As the debt under these two invoices exceeded the Section 4 threshold of Rs 1 crore, the adjudicating authority was required to consider them on merits. The impugned dismissal was set aside, the Section 9 application was restored, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration limited to those invoices - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
