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...
Addressing allegations of fraudulent and wrongful trading, the...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismissed
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Addressing allegations of fraudulent and wrongful trading, the text explains that for liability under Section 66(1) IBC the transaction must be knowingly executed with a dishonest intention to defraud creditors, and that finding must be proved on the preponderance of probability consequence: dishonest intent must be established before contribution can be ordered. It clarifies that Section 66(2) wrongful trading liability attaches only to directors or partners who knew or ought to have known there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvency and failed to minimize creditor loss consequence: director-specific liability is required. Factual transaction-audit and unit visit evidence led to dismissal of the appeal.
Addressing allegations of fraudulent and wrongful trading, the text explains that for liability under Section 66(1) IBC the transaction must be knowingly executed with a dishonest intention to defraud creditors, and that finding must be proved on the preponderance of probability consequence: dishonest intent must be established before contribution can be ordered. It clarifies that Section 66(2) wrongful trading liability attaches only to directors or partners who knew or ought to have known there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvency and failed to minimize creditor loss consequence: director-specific liability is required. Factual transaction-audit and unit visit evidence led to dismissal of the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
