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 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.