Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Short deduction of tax at source did not warrant disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), and the related royalty-characterisation questions were treated as academic. Corporate guarantee commission was upheld at 0.5% because a corporate guarantee to an associated enterprise is not comparable to a bank guarantee, so no substantial question of law arose. On section 14A, where the assessee's own and other non-interest-bearing funds exceeded tax-free investments, a presumption arose that the investments came from interest-free funds, defeating interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Only the re-framed question under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) concerning investments yielding exempt income during the year was entertained.
Short deduction of tax at source did not warrant disallowance under section 40(a)(ia), and the related royalty-characterisation questions were treated as academic. Corporate guarantee commission was upheld at 0.5% because a corporate guarantee to an associated enterprise is not comparable to a bank guarantee, so no substantial question of law arose. On section 14A, where the assessee's own and other non-interest-bearing funds exceeded tax-free investments, a presumption arose that the investments came from interest-free funds, defeating interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Only the re-framed question under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) concerning investments yielding exempt income during the year was entertained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
