Captive power transfer pricing and non-resident export commission rules support deletion of adjustments and withholding disallowance in discussed proc...
Cooperative society deposits, member-interest TDS exemption and credit-facility deduction claims require verification through records and supporting e...
Customs jurisdiction over EPCG condition breaches survives export-obligation discharge certificates, requiring alleged fraud and misdeclaration to be ...
Contractual tolerance requires consideration; breach recoveries, qualifying public infrastructure services and road works escape service tax liability...
Seeking restoration of name of the company on ROC - failure to file the Financial Statement and Annual Returns since incorporation - Section 252 of Companies Act, 2013 - The Appellate Tribunal noted that while the appellant had filed financial statements until 2015-16, there was a gap in filings for the subsequent years. However, the appellant had produced independent auditor reports for the missing years, demonstrating substantial assets and indicating a bonafide intention to comply. - Considering the appellant's substantial assets, the Tribunal found it just and equitable to restore the company's name to the Register of Companies. They emphasized that the appellant was not a shell company or engaged in fund siphoning, and the restoration would not prejudice the Registrar of Companies.
Seeking restoration of name of the company on ROC - failure to file the Financial Statement and Annual Returns since incorporation - Section 252 of Companies Act, 2013 - The Appellate Tribunal noted that while the appellant had filed financial statements until 2015-16, there was a gap in filings for the subsequent years. However, the appellant had produced independent auditor reports for the missing years, demonstrating substantial assets and indicating a bonafide intention to comply. - Considering the appellant's substantial assets, the Tribunal found it just and equitable to restore the company's name to the Register of Companies. They emphasized that the appellant was not a shell company or engaged in fund siphoning, and the restoration would not prejudice the Registrar of Companies.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
