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 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A fresh claim for possession of premises in liquidation was barred by res judicata and issue estoppel because the later application was virtually identical to the earlier rejected one and no liberty had been reserved to re-agitate it. On merits, the HC held that summary jurisdiction under Section 457 of the Companies Act is confined to whether the Official Liquidator has a relevant reason to remain in possession. As liquidation was continuing and the premises were still being used, continued retention was justified, and the applicant could not compel surrender of vested tenancy rights or conversion to a leave and licence arrangement. The application was dismissed with costs.
A fresh claim for possession of premises in liquidation was barred by res judicata and issue estoppel because the later application was virtually identical to the earlier rejected one and no liberty had been reserved to re-agitate it. On merits, the HC held that summary jurisdiction under Section 457 of the Companies Act is confined to whether the Official Liquidator has a relevant reason to remain in possession. As liquidation was continuing and the premises were still being used, continued retention was justified, and the applicant could not compel surrender of vested tenancy rights or conversion to a leave and licence arrangement. The application was dismissed with costs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
