Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1461 to 1480 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In Section 95 insolvency proceedings against personal guarantors, limitation under Article 137 had to be assessed from the actual invocation of guarantee and the date of default, not from the Form B demand notice. The Tribunal held that the Adjudicating Authority erred in treating Form B as invocation, and noted that a decree obtained within limitation could furnish a fresh cause of action. It also found the limitation computation flawed because Covid-related exclusion days were deducted without adequate basis. Letters dated 17.03.2022 and 12.07.2022, and admission of the creditor's claim in the corporate debtor's CIRP, were material on acknowledgment and limitation but had not been properly considered, so the matter was remanded for fresh, reasoned decision.
In Section 95 insolvency proceedings against personal guarantors, limitation under Article 137 had to be assessed from the actual invocation of guarantee and the date of default, not from the Form B demand notice. The Tribunal held that the Adjudicating Authority erred in treating Form B as invocation, and noted that a decree obtained within limitation could furnish a fresh cause of action. It also found the limitation computation flawed because Covid-related exclusion days were deducted without adequate basis. Letters dated 17.03.2022 and 12.07.2022, and admission of the creditor's claim in the corporate debtor's CIRP, were material on acknowledgment and limitation but had not been properly considered, so the matter was remanded for fresh, reasoned decision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
