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" ?
SC held that a non-executive director cannot be held vicariously liable under Section 141 of NI Act for dishonored cheques where he had resigned prior to the offense and was not actively involved in company operations. Court emphasized that mere directorship designation is insufficient to establish liability - specific allegations of active involvement in company affairs are required. Evidence showed appellant was neither a cheque signatory nor involved in financial decisions, having resigned as independent non-executive director with proper ROC notifications. Given his limited role without financial or operational responsibilities, the complaints failed to meet legal requirements for vicarious liability. Appeal allowed, setting aside HC's judgment.
SC held that a non-executive director cannot be held vicariously liable under Section 141 of NI Act for dishonored cheques where he had resigned prior to the offense and was not actively involved in company operations. Court emphasized that mere directorship designation is insufficient to establish liability - specific allegations of active involvement in company affairs are required. Evidence showed appellant was neither a cheque signatory nor involved in financial decisions, having resigned as independent non-executive director with proper ROC notifications. Given his limited role without financial or operational responsibilities, the complaints failed to meet legal requirements for vicarious liability. Appeal allowed, setting aside HC's judgment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.