Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Submission of a repayment plan under the personal guarantor insolvency framework is mandatory, and one-time settlement proposals cannot replace it. Because the personal guarantors admittedly failed to submit any repayment plan despite opportunity, the Tribunal treated the plan as deemed rejected and upheld the creditor's move to initiate bankruptcy under the Code. Co-extensive liability under the guarantee deed was recognised, and objections about dues calculation, earlier settlement efforts, and prior SARFAESI or insolvency events did not defeat the bankruptcy process at this stage. The Tribunal affirmed the maintainability of the bankruptcy applications and sustained initiation of proceedings against the guarantors.
Submission of a repayment plan under the personal guarantor insolvency framework is mandatory, and one-time settlement proposals cannot replace it. Because the personal guarantors admittedly failed to submit any repayment plan despite opportunity, the Tribunal treated the plan as deemed rejected and upheld the creditor's move to initiate bankruptcy under the Code. Co-extensive liability under the guarantee deed was recognised, and objections about dues calculation, earlier settlement efforts, and prior SARFAESI or insolvency events did not defeat the bankruptcy process at this stage. The Tribunal affirmed the maintainability of the bankruptcy applications and sustained initiation of proceedings against the guarantors.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.