Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Payments of Rs. 19,66,698.77 made to a related party director within the two year look back period were treated as preferential transactions because the payments reduced the corporate debtor's liability to the related party and could not be excluded by tracing the source of funds. The tribunal held that Regulation 35A timelines are directory, not mandatory, and principles of natural justice were not breached where the adjudicating authority considered the appellant's written objections on merits despite an earlier ex parte notation. The liquidator's investigative power during liquidation to challenge preferential or undervalued transactions validated the challenge; appeals were dismissed.
Payments of Rs. 19,66,698.77 made to a related party director within the two year look back period were treated as preferential transactions because the payments reduced the corporate debtor's liability to the related party and could not be excluded by tracing the source of funds. The tribunal held that Regulation 35A timelines are directory, not mandatory, and principles of natural justice were not breached where the adjudicating authority considered the appellant's written objections on merits despite an earlier ex parte notation. The liquidator's investigative power during liquidation to challenge preferential or undervalued transactions validated the challenge; appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
