Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The HC held that the appeal filed by appellant No.1 CRBCML, through appellant No.2 Mr. C.R. Bhansali, is not maintainable in law u/s 483 read with Sections 521 & 531-A of the Companies Act, 1956. The objections raised by them to the clarification applications preferred by the applicants/transferees in the winding-up petition cannot be entertained. Since the sale of shares took place prior to 09.04.1997, although the company remained its de jure owner, the de facto legal right or title passed on to the applicants in the ordinary course of business and was saved by Section 562(2) of the Act. The appeal is dismissed.
The HC held that the appeal filed by appellant No.1 CRBCML, through appellant No.2 Mr. C.R. Bhansali, is not maintainable in law u/s 483 read with Sections 521 & 531-A of the Companies Act, 1956. The objections raised by them to the clarification applications preferred by the applicants/transferees in the winding-up petition cannot be entertained. Since the sale of shares took place prior to 09.04.1997, although the company remained its de jure owner, the de facto legal right or title passed on to the applicants in the ordinary course of business and was saved by Section 562(2) of the Act. The appeal is dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
