Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Necessary-party principles in oppression and mismanagement...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determination.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Necessary-party principles in oppression and mismanagement proceedings require impleadment only where an entity's presence is needed for effective adjudication. Independent businesses alleged to have benefited from diversion of company funds or business were not treated as necessary parties merely to support the petitioner's allegations, particularly where the principal allegations concerned an existing respondent. Deferral of the impleadment application for possible consideration at final hearing did not finally determine the dispute or adversely affect rights. The discussion states that an appeal against such deferral is not maintainable, while leaving impleadment open if later required for effective adjudication.
Necessary-party principles in oppression and mismanagement proceedings require impleadment only where an entity's presence is needed for effective adjudication. Independent businesses alleged to have benefited from diversion of company funds or business were not treated as necessary parties merely to support the petitioner's allegations, particularly where the principal allegations concerned an existing respondent. Deferral of the impleadment application for possible consideration at final hearing did not finally determine the dispute or adversely affect rights. The discussion states that an appeal against such deferral is not maintainable, while leaving impleadment open if later required for effective adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
