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 Tribunal has the authority to order the purchase of shares by the company from any member u/s 242(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 2013, in cases of oppression and mismanagement. The Supreme Court has held that even without finding oppression, the court may grant relief to achieve substantial justice between parties. Though reasons were not explicitly stated, the Tribunal considered submissions and cited case laws before passing the order u/s 242(2)(b). As the respondent cannot sell shares in the open market, being a private company, the Tribunal's order to purchase shares is not prejudicial and aids smooth company operations. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, finding no illegality in the Tribunal's order.
The Tribunal has the authority to order the purchase of shares by the company from any member u/s 242(2)(b) of the Companies Act, 2013, in cases of oppression and mismanagement. The Supreme Court has held that even without finding oppression, the court may grant relief to achieve substantial justice between parties. Though reasons were not explicitly stated, the Tribunal considered submissions and cited case laws before passing the order u/s 242(2)(b). As the respondent cannot sell shares in the open market, being a private company, the Tribunal's order to purchase shares is not prejudicial and aids smooth company operations. The NCLAT dismissed the appeal, finding no illegality in the Tribunal's order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
