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...
The case involves an offence under FEMA with regard to the business conduct of a company. The liability of a director for contravention of provisions depends on their role in the company, not just their designation. The main person in charge was actively involved in the company's affairs, while other directors were not. One retired director was directly responsible for accounts in foreign banks. The respondents, although directors, were not actively involved in decision-making or in charge of the company's affairs. Lack of evidence showing their responsibility for the company's conduct led the Appellate Tribunal to dismiss the Revision Petition.
The case involves an offence under FEMA with regard to the business conduct of a company. The liability of a director for contravention of provisions depends on their role in the company, not just their designation. The main person in charge was actively involved in the company's affairs, while other directors were not. One retired director was directly responsible for accounts in foreign banks. The respondents, although directors, were not actively involved in decision-making or in charge of the company's affairs. Lack of evidence showing their responsibility for the company's conduct led the Appellate Tribunal to dismiss the Revision Petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.