Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Scope of the term “Principal Officer” of the company for the purposes of initiating prosecution u/s 276B - The High Court opinioned that merely because a person holds an office in a corporate entity would not be sufficient to place that individual in clause (b). The intention of the respondent to treat an individual as the “Principal Officer” must be based on it being satisfied that the person was connected with the management or administration of the company. - The court finds that the respondents failed to establish the petitioner's connection with the management or administration of the company based on the evidence presented. Therefore, the impugned orders are set aside and restored back for fresh adjudication.
Scope of the term “Principal Officer” of the company for the purposes of initiating prosecution u/s 276B - The High Court opinioned that merely because a person holds an office in a corporate entity would not be sufficient to place that individual in clause (b). The intention of the respondent to treat an individual as the “Principal Officer” must be based on it being satisfied that the person was connected with the management or administration of the company. - The court finds that the respondents failed to establish the petitioner's connection with the management or administration of the company based on the evidence presented. Therefore, the impugned orders are set aside and restored back for fresh adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.