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...
The Tribunal considered whether a security deposit taken under an interim order could continue to be retained under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code where the underlying contractual dispute was to be addressed through arbitration. It held that retention of the deposit after the miscellaneous application had been finally decided required an independent assessment under the Arbitration Act, and that directing continued retention under the IBC before arbitration commenced would be arbitrary. By consent, the impugned direction was modified so the amount would remain only as security until either party initiates arbitration, after which further custody of the amount would be governed by the arbitrator's orders on appropriate interlocutory applications.
The Tribunal considered whether a security deposit taken under an interim order could continue to be retained under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code where the underlying contractual dispute was to be addressed through arbitration. It held that retention of the deposit after the miscellaneous application had been finally decided required an independent assessment under the Arbitration Act, and that directing continued retention under the IBC before arbitration commenced would be arbitrary. By consent, the impugned direction was modified so the amount would remain only as security until either party initiates arbitration, after which further custody of the amount would be governed by the arbitrator's orders on appropriate interlocutory applications.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.