Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
A disputed refund of advance paid for supply of goods was not treated as an undisputed operational debt, because the parties had continued negotiations, entered a later settlement arrangement, and the corporate debtor had asserted forfeiture for failure to lift stock within time. On that basis, debt and default were held not to coexist for Section 9 insolvency relief, and any challenge to forfeiture had to be pursued elsewhere. The Tribunal also held that limitation ran from the first refund demand, so the insolvency notice issued more than three years later was time-barred under Article 137. The Section 9 application was therefore dismissed.
A disputed refund of advance paid for supply of goods was not treated as an undisputed operational debt, because the parties had continued negotiations, entered a later settlement arrangement, and the corporate debtor had asserted forfeiture for failure to lift stock within time. On that basis, debt and default were held not to coexist for Section 9 insolvency relief, and any challenge to forfeiture had to be pursued elsewhere. The Tribunal also held that limitation ran from the first refund demand, so the insolvency notice issued more than three years later was time-barred under Article 137. The Section 9 application was therefore dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
