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" ?
The SC upheld that the partnership did not automatically dissolve upon the death of a partner, as Section 42 of the Partnership Act applies only to two-partner firms. Here, the partnership involved three partners, and the deed explicitly allowed continuation despite a partner's death. The Dealership Agreement empowered IOCL to either continue, reconstitute, or terminate the dealership upon such death. IOCL had not terminated the agreement but refused to recognize the reconstituted firm including the surviving partners and one heir, citing non-participation by all heirs. The SC found IOCL misconstrued its guidelines by denying recognition without valid grounds. Consequently, the partnership was deemed to continue lawfully, and the High Court's order upholding this was affirmed. The special leave petition was dismissed.
The SC upheld that the partnership did not automatically dissolve upon the death of a partner, as Section 42 of the Partnership Act applies only to two-partner firms. Here, the partnership involved three partners, and the deed explicitly allowed continuation despite a partner's death. The Dealership Agreement empowered IOCL to either continue, reconstitute, or terminate the dealership upon such death. IOCL had not terminated the agreement but refused to recognize the reconstituted firm including the surviving partners and one heir, citing non-participation by all heirs. The SC found IOCL misconstrued its guidelines by denying recognition without valid grounds. Consequently, the partnership was deemed to continue lawfully, and the High Court's order upholding this was affirmed. The special leave petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.