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 plaintiffs/appellants, as universal legatees of the estate of Late Smt. Priyamvada Debi Birla, lack legal standing to initiate the suit seeking a declaration that the decision taken by the defendant/respondent-Company to obtain leasehold rights is illegal and void. Section 211 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 vests the property of the deceased in the Administrator Pendente Lite (APL) appointed by the Testamentary Court, making the APL the legal representative. The plaintiffs, as legatees, cannot bypass the APL and assert rights over the estate directly. Their remedy, if aggrieved by the APL's functioning, lies in approaching the Testamentary Court. The plaintiffs are not "members" of the defendant-companies and cannot invoke the NCLT's jurisdiction u/ss 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013. The High Court dismissed the application for interim injunction, finding the Single Judge's reasoned order justified and not warranting interference.
The plaintiffs/appellants, as universal legatees of the estate of Late Smt. Priyamvada Debi Birla, lack legal standing to initiate the suit seeking a declaration that the decision taken by the defendant/respondent-Company to obtain leasehold rights is illegal and void. Section 211 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 vests the property of the deceased in the Administrator Pendente Lite (APL) appointed by the Testamentary Court, making the APL the legal representative. The plaintiffs, as legatees, cannot bypass the APL and assert rights over the estate directly. Their remedy, if aggrieved by the APL's functioning, lies in approaching the Testamentary Court. The plaintiffs are not "members" of the defendant-companies and cannot invoke the NCLT's jurisdiction u/ss 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013. The High Court dismissed the application for interim injunction, finding the Single Judge's reasoned order justified and not warranting interference.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
