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...
A pre-CIRP concession agreement that had already been terminated could not be compelled to revive through an approved resolution plan or a later implementation order, because it no longer formed part of the CIRP estate in a manner permitting such direction. The NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority had exceeded its permissible scope by directing the appellant, who was not a CIRP participant, to act on the plan insofar as it required revival of the agreement. The order was modified to remove any such direction, while the parties were left free to pursue conciliation or arbitration in accordance with law.
A pre-CIRP concession agreement that had already been terminated could not be compelled to revive through an approved resolution plan or a later implementation order, because it no longer formed part of the CIRP estate in a manner permitting such direction. The NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority had exceeded its permissible scope by directing the appellant, who was not a CIRP participant, to act on the plan insofar as it required revival of the agreement. The order was modified to remove any such direction, while the parties were left free to pursue conciliation or arbitration in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.