Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the existence of a financial debt and default, but the Supreme Court held that insolvency cannot be used as a coercive recovery tool. Reading the quadripartite agreement, the Court found that the disbursement was made to the builder and was tied to construction, transfer, refund contingencies, non-transfer without consent, and security creation, making the dispute predominantly contractual rather than a simple lending default. As recovery proceedings were already pending before the DRT, initiation of CIRP was unwarranted and the refusal to admit the Section 7 application was upheld.
Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the existence of a financial debt and default, but the Supreme Court held that insolvency cannot be used as a coercive recovery tool. Reading the quadripartite agreement, the Court found that the disbursement was made to the builder and was tied to construction, transfer, refund contingencies, non-transfer without consent, and security creation, making the dispute predominantly contractual rather than a simple lending default. As recovery proceedings were already pending before the DRT, initiation of CIRP was unwarranted and the refusal to admit the Section 7 application was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
