Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is permissible despite pending Company Court proceedings where statutory timelines for a Scheme of Arrangement were missed; the Rules of 2016 required transfer of unresolved second-motion proceedings to the Tribunal, and a belated unacted application is incompetent and should have been transferred. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code prevails over inconsistent provisions of the Companies Act, permitting CIRP priority and appointment and powers of an Interim Resolution Professional during moratorium. A scheme or compromise may still be considered within an IBC proceeding at the appropriate stage; the appellate order was set aside and the Tribunal's CIRP direction restored.
Initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is permissible despite pending Company Court proceedings where statutory timelines for a Scheme of Arrangement were missed; the Rules of 2016 required transfer of unresolved second-motion proceedings to the Tribunal, and a belated unacted application is incompetent and should have been transferred. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code prevails over inconsistent provisions of the Companies Act, permitting CIRP priority and appointment and powers of an Interim Resolution Professional during moratorium. A scheme or compromise may still be considered within an IBC proceeding at the appropriate stage; the appellate order was set aside and the Tribunal's CIRP direction restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.