Revenue neutrality in domestic related-party loans can require deletion of interest transfer pricing adjustments after domestic-transaction verificati...
In a dispute involving corporate governance and alleged oppressive conduct, the Tri examined multiple allegations against the Respondent No. 1 Company. After comprehensive review of claims including unauthorized share buy-back, remuneration discrepancies, and potential fraudulent transactions, the Tri found no substantive evidence of oppressive practices. The tribunal determined that the Petitioner failed to establish grounds under Section 213 of the Companies Act, 2013. Key findings included: legitimate employment perquisites, timely insurance policy credits, and no proven benami property transactions. The board's dividend discretion was affirmed, and procedural challenges were deemed time-barred. Consequently, the Tri dismissed the petition, ruling no oppressive conduct was demonstrated.
In a dispute involving corporate governance and alleged oppressive conduct, the Tri examined multiple allegations against the Respondent No. 1 Company. After comprehensive review of claims including unauthorized share buy-back, remuneration discrepancies, and potential fraudulent transactions, the Tri found no substantive evidence of oppressive practices. The tribunal determined that the Petitioner failed to establish grounds under Section 213 of the Companies Act, 2013. Key findings included: legitimate employment perquisites, timely insurance policy credits, and no proven benami property transactions. The board's dividend discretion was affirmed, and procedural challenges were deemed time-barred. Consequently, the Tri dismissed the petition, ruling no oppressive conduct was demonstrated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
