Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Board found that the promoters and promoter-related entities of the Company violated SEBI regulations and Section 67 of the Companies Act, 2013, by diverting company funds through connected entities for trading in the Company's shares, resulting in misleading disclosures to investors. The promoters submitted forged lender conduct letters and failed to disclose related party transactions as mandated under SEBI LODR Regulations. The Board observed weak internal controls and directed interim measures under SEBI Act to protect investor interests: promoters were restrained from holding directorial or KMP positions and from trading in securities; the announced stock split was stayed; and a forensic audit of the Company and its related parties was ordered. These directions remain in force pending further orders, with the promoters given an opportunity to file objections and seek a personal hearing.
The Board found that the promoters and promoter-related entities of the Company violated SEBI regulations and Section 67 of the Companies Act, 2013, by diverting company funds through connected entities for trading in the Company's shares, resulting in misleading disclosures to investors. The promoters submitted forged lender conduct letters and failed to disclose related party transactions as mandated under SEBI LODR Regulations. The Board observed weak internal controls and directed interim measures under SEBI Act to protect investor interests: promoters were restrained from holding directorial or KMP positions and from trading in securities; the announced stock split was stayed; and a forensic audit of the Company and its related parties was ordered. These directions remain in force pending further orders, with the promoters given an opportunity to file objections and seek a personal hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
