Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT determined that failure to file Board Reports for FY 2010-11 and 2013-14 constituted continuing offences under s.220 of Companies Act, 1956. While appellants admitted default in filing with ROC, evidence showed reports were circulated to shareholders timely with no prejudice to stakeholders. Considering the inadvertent nature of omission, self-disclosure by appellant, and comparable precedents, NCLAT modified the penalty structure. The tribunal reduced compounding fees to Rs.50 per day of continuing default for both company and directors, finding original penalty excessive. The appeal succeeded with modified penalties applied under s.220 read with s.162 of Companies Act, 1956.
NCLAT determined that failure to file Board Reports for FY 2010-11 and 2013-14 constituted continuing offences under s.220 of Companies Act, 1956. While appellants admitted default in filing with ROC, evidence showed reports were circulated to shareholders timely with no prejudice to stakeholders. Considering the inadvertent nature of omission, self-disclosure by appellant, and comparable precedents, NCLAT modified the penalty structure. The tribunal reduced compounding fees to Rs.50 per day of continuing default for both company and directors, finding original penalty excessive. The appeal succeeded with modified penalties applied under s.220 read with s.162 of Companies Act, 1956.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
