Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
Oppression and Mismanagement - removal of director for not attending three consecutive meetings - extract of meeting dated 20.5.2010 has been signed by the appellant, it also establishes that impliedly the leave of absence in defacto is given - respondents were very well aware that the appellant is in U.K. despite notice issued to Visakhapatnam address and despite corresponding with the appellant via emails, no notice via mail was given - filing Form No.32 with ROC for vacation of office by the appellant is not legal
Oppression and Mismanagement - removal of director for not attending three consecutive meetings - extract of meeting dated 20.5.2010 has been signed by the appellant, it also establishes that impliedly the leave of absence in defacto is given - respondents were very well aware that the appellant is in U.K. despite notice issued to Visakhapatnam address and despite corresponding with the appellant via emails, no notice via mail was given - filing Form No.32 with ROC for vacation of office by the appellant is not legal
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
