Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
841 to 860 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 88(3) of the GST enactments makes directors of a private company in liquidation jointly and severally liable for unrecovered tax dues incurred during their tenure, unless they establish before the Commissioner that non-recovery was not caused by their gross neglect, misfeasance or breach of duty. The notes state that a director's later retirement from an associated partnership does not by itself prevent recovery from that firm's accounts where the person was a partner during the default period. They also address recovery from related entities: interchanged family management and formation of a subsequent company to avoid arrears may justify examination of whether the corporate veil should be lifted.
Section 88(3) of the GST enactments makes directors of a private company in liquidation jointly and severally liable for unrecovered tax dues incurred during their tenure, unless they establish before the Commissioner that non-recovery was not caused by their gross neglect, misfeasance or breach of duty. The notes state that a director's later retirement from an associated partnership does not by itself prevent recovery from that firm's accounts where the person was a partner during the default period. They also address recovery from related entities: interchanged family management and formation of a subsequent company to avoid arrears may justify examination of whether the corporate veil should be lifted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.