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" ?
Withdrawal of a Section 9 insolvency petition on the basis of settlement brings the lis to an end, and restoration is not maintainable unless the withdrawal order expressly reserves that liberty. The NCLAT held that a settlement, once acted on through consensual withdrawal, is executable as a concluded arrangement, but the law of restoration applicable to dismissed-for-default matters does not apply. Breach of settlement terms does not amount to a fresh operational debt default justifying revival of the concluded insolvency proceeding; the proper remedy lies in enforcement or recovery before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. The appeal against rejection of restoration was therefore upheld.
Withdrawal of a Section 9 insolvency petition on the basis of settlement brings the lis to an end, and restoration is not maintainable unless the withdrawal order expressly reserves that liberty. The NCLAT held that a settlement, once acted on through consensual withdrawal, is executable as a concluded arrangement, but the law of restoration applicable to dismissed-for-default matters does not apply. Breach of settlement terms does not amount to a fresh operational debt default justifying revival of the concluded insolvency proceeding; the proper remedy lies in enforcement or recovery before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. The appeal against rejection of restoration was therefore upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
