Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.