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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
Corporate guarantee and cost-overrun undertakings were interpreted as limited obligations to infuse equity, meet shortfalls, or cover specified contingencies; they did not create a liability to repay the principal borrower's loan, so a Section 7 petition against the corporate debtor was not maintainable on that basis. The tribunal also held that default of the principal borrower could not be treated as the guarantor's default; default arose only after invocation of the guarantee and non-payment thereafter, which on the bank's own case fell within the Section 10A suspension period. Non-consideration of the later guarantee deed and inconsistent treatment of the same transaction further indicated non-application of mind, making the admission order unsustainable.
Corporate guarantee and cost-overrun undertakings were interpreted as limited obligations to infuse equity, meet shortfalls, or cover specified contingencies; they did not create a liability to repay the principal borrower's loan, so a Section 7 petition against the corporate debtor was not maintainable on that basis. The tribunal also held that default of the principal borrower could not be treated as the guarantor's default; default arose only after invocation of the guarantee and non-payment thereafter, which on the bank's own case fell within the Section 10A suspension period. Non-consideration of the later guarantee deed and inconsistent treatment of the same transaction further indicated non-application of mind, making the admission order unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.