Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1001 to 1020 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Proceeds of crime were considered regarding the refund amount from unsuccessful IPO applications due to malpractices and manipulations by certain entities. The SEBI determined unlawful gains by taking the difference between the sale and allotment amounts, while the FIR/ECIR recorded the entire amount as 'proceeds of crime' used for cheating the public. The SEBI order was within its provisions, distinct from the Act of 2002. There were no discrepancies or contradictions in the amount mentioned in the orders. The allegation of discrimination in treatment was unsubstantiated. The appeals failed as none of the arguments raised by the appellant had merit.
Proceeds of crime were considered regarding the refund amount from unsuccessful IPO applications due to malpractices and manipulations by certain entities. The SEBI determined unlawful gains by taking the difference between the sale and allotment amounts, while the FIR/ECIR recorded the entire amount as 'proceeds of crime' used for cheating the public. The SEBI order was within its provisions, distinct from the Act of 2002. There were no discrepancies or contradictions in the amount mentioned in the orders. The allegation of discrimination in treatment was unsubstantiated. The appeals failed as none of the arguments raised by the appellant had merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
