Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
An ex parte ad interim injunction restraining a statutory director-removal process was held maintainable in appeal, but the injunction itself was unsustainable. The court held that director status under Section 2(34) is functional and does not depend on shareholding; once appointed and filed in office, the person remains subject to removal under Section 169. It further held that Section 430 barred civil court interference with internal corporate action, and lack of locus before the tribunal did not revive civil jurisdiction because a waiver route was available. The injunction also failed because the order gave no reasoned satisfaction on prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
An ex parte ad interim injunction restraining a statutory director-removal process was held maintainable in appeal, but the injunction itself was unsustainable. The court held that director status under Section 2(34) is functional and does not depend on shareholding; once appointed and filed in office, the person remains subject to removal under Section 169. It further held that Section 430 barred civil court interference with internal corporate action, and lack of locus before the tribunal did not revive civil jurisdiction because a waiver route was available. The injunction also failed because the order gave no reasoned satisfaction on prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
