Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
A Section 9 insolvency application was rejected because the record disclosed a genuine pre-existing dispute between the parties. The corporate debtor had, before the demand notice, complained of defective consignments, including rusting and non-conformity with specifications, sought replacement, and rejected the goods; the operational creditor's own emails acknowledging quality deficiency and offering compensation reinforced that the dispute was real. The tribunal held that the adjudicating authority need only see whether the dispute is a plausible contention requiring further investigation, not a patently feeble defence. It also held that issues on CFR INCOTERMS and Sale of Goods Act remedies were outside summary insolvency jurisdiction, and the rejection of the application was affirmed.
A Section 9 insolvency application was rejected because the record disclosed a genuine pre-existing dispute between the parties. The corporate debtor had, before the demand notice, complained of defective consignments, including rusting and non-conformity with specifications, sought replacement, and rejected the goods; the operational creditor's own emails acknowledging quality deficiency and offering compensation reinforced that the dispute was real. The tribunal held that the adjudicating authority need only see whether the dispute is a plausible contention requiring further investigation, not a patently feeble defence. It also held that issues on CFR INCOTERMS and Sale of Goods Act remedies were outside summary insolvency jurisdiction, and the rejection of the application was affirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
