Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Division of shares among the deceased's children - Interpretation of will - To be treated as part of her "movable properties" or not - The High Court upheld the CLB's interpretation that the shares in question fell within the purview of "movable properties" bequeathed by the will. The court observed that despite the absence of explicit mention of the shares, the will's intention to equally distribute all movable and immovable properties among the deceased's children was clear. - The court found the allotment of additional shares in the appellant companies to one of the children (represented by the appellants) to be done without proper authority, violating the provisions of the Companies Act. It deemed the CLB's decision to cancel this allotment as justified.
Division of shares among the deceased's children - Interpretation of will - To be treated as part of her "movable properties" or not - The High Court upheld the CLB's interpretation that the shares in question fell within the purview of "movable properties" bequeathed by the will. The court observed that despite the absence of explicit mention of the shares, the will's intention to equally distribute all movable and immovable properties among the deceased's children was clear. - The court found the allotment of additional shares in the appellant companies to one of the children (represented by the appellants) to be done without proper authority, violating the provisions of the Companies Act. It deemed the CLB's decision to cancel this allotment as justified.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
