Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
RPA (Remote Pilot Aircraft) for military use defined to include drones/UAV/UAS; exemptions limited to specified defence imports with Joint Secretary c...
Transfer of going concern and transfer of input tax credit under GST allowed; exemption applies though interstate ledger transfers left to authorities...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6701 to 6720 of 96406 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal treated the square-off of receivables as a related party preferential transaction within the relevant look-back period under the insolvency framework. It found that the appellant, as director and key managerial person, controlled the entities involved, that the adjustment was recorded within two years of the insolvency commencement date, and that accounting entries could amount to transfer of property by extinguishing the corporate debtor's receivable. The Tribunal also rejected the ordinary course of business defence because the set-off bypassed banking channels, lacked authorisation, and selectively settled the appellant's dues while other creditors remained unpaid. The impugned transaction was therefore liable to be avoided.
The Appellate Tribunal treated the square-off of receivables as a related party preferential transaction within the relevant look-back period under the insolvency framework. It found that the appellant, as director and key managerial person, controlled the entities involved, that the adjustment was recorded within two years of the insolvency commencement date, and that accounting entries could amount to transfer of property by extinguishing the corporate debtor's receivable. The Tribunal also rejected the ordinary course of business defence because the set-off bypassed banking channels, lacked authorisation, and selectively settled the appellant's dues while other creditors remained unpaid. The impugned transaction was therefore liable to be avoided.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.