Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5561 to 5580 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In a back-to-back construction contract, the NCLAT held that where the corporate debtor was entitled only to a 4% margin and had assigned the risks, liabilities and profit share to the sub-contractor, the remaining 96% of receivables from the principal employer belonged to the sub-contractor and was held in trust outside the liquidation estate under section 36(4)(a)(i). It also held that, because the project continued during CIRP to keep the corporate debtor as a going concern, the sub-contractor's running bills formed part of CIRP costs rather than operational debt, and no claim in Form C was required. Interest on the withheld amount was confined to simple interest at 9% up to the date of the impugned order.
In a back-to-back construction contract, the NCLAT held that where the corporate debtor was entitled only to a 4% margin and had assigned the risks, liabilities and profit share to the sub-contractor, the remaining 96% of receivables from the principal employer belonged to the sub-contractor and was held in trust outside the liquidation estate under section 36(4)(a)(i). It also held that, because the project continued during CIRP to keep the corporate debtor as a going concern, the sub-contractor's running bills formed part of CIRP costs rather than operational debt, and no claim in Form C was required. Interest on the withheld amount was confined to simple interest at 9% up to the date of the impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
