Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The NCLAT upheld admission of CIRP and rejected the objection that Tower 5 should be excluded from the Section 7 threshold, holding that the insolvency was initiated for the same real estate project as a whole and that the Adjudicating Authority could examine the total units and applicants accordingly. It held that the IBC moratorium under Section 14 and its overriding effect under Section 238 prevent arbitration or interim orders from obstructing CIRP, and that claims over development rights or termination issues must be considered by the Resolution Professional at the appropriate stage. The Tribunal also held that development rights can form part of the corporate debtor's property under Section 3(27), while the admission order made no conclusive finding on title to Tower 5.
The NCLAT upheld admission of CIRP and rejected the objection that Tower 5 should be excluded from the Section 7 threshold, holding that the insolvency was initiated for the same real estate project as a whole and that the Adjudicating Authority could examine the total units and applicants accordingly. It held that the IBC moratorium under Section 14 and its overriding effect under Section 238 prevent arbitration or interim orders from obstructing CIRP, and that claims over development rights or termination issues must be considered by the Resolution Professional at the appropriate stage. The Tribunal also held that development rights can form part of the corporate debtor's property under Section 3(27), while the admission order made no conclusive finding on title to Tower 5.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.