Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Disqualification of a director of the financial creditor to sign the Section 7 application was challenged. The application u/s 7, signed by the director of the financial creditor company, was rejected. The appellant contended that the Infracon company, where Sachdeva was also a director, had been struck off due to non-filing of financial statements for three years, attracting director disqualification u/s 164. The Tribunal held that Section 164(2) requires non-filing of financial statements or annual returns for any continuous period of three financial years, which was not applicable in this case. The company was incorporated in 2014, and the last balance sheet filing date was 31.03.2015. The proviso to Section 167(1), inserted in 2018, was also not applicable to disqualify Sachdeva as a director in the financial creditor company. As the Infracon company had already been struck off when the Section 7 application was filed, Sachdeva could not continue as its director but remained competent to act as a director in the financial creditor company. The Adjudicating Authority's order rejecting the application was upheld, and the appeals were dismissed.
Disqualification of a director of the financial creditor to sign the Section 7 application was challenged. The application u/s 7, signed by the director of the financial creditor company, was rejected. The appellant contended that the Infracon company, where Sachdeva was also a director, had been struck off due to non-filing of financial statements for three years, attracting director disqualification u/s 164. The Tribunal held that Section 164(2) requires non-filing of financial statements or annual returns for any continuous period of three financial years, which was not applicable in this case. The company was incorporated in 2014, and the last balance sheet filing date was 31.03.2015. The proviso to Section 167(1), inserted in 2018, was also not applicable to disqualify Sachdeva as a director in the financial creditor company. As the Infracon company had already been struck off when the Section 7 application was filed, Sachdeva could not continue as its director but remained competent to act as a director in the financial creditor company. The Adjudicating Authority's order rejecting the application was upheld, and the appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
