Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Customs Assessment Portal centralises classification and valuation guidance to support consistent, transparent and informed compliance across stakehol...
Page of 4918
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 98359 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 dismissed the SLP on grounds of both unexplained delay of 271 days and merits. The Court upheld the HC's finding that share premium received on issuance of shares constitutes a capital account transaction and does not generate income. The addition of the entire share premium as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 was improper, given the absence of any violation of Section 78(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 regarding utilization of the share premium account. The Assessing Officer's failure to distinguish between creation of share premium and utilization of funds was affirmed. Consequently, no interference was warranted with the HC order, and the addition to income was disallowed.
The SC dismissed the SLP on grounds of both unexplained delay of 271 days and merits. The Court upheld the HC's finding that share premium received on issuance of shares constitutes a capital account transaction and does not generate income. The addition of the entire share premium as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 was improper, given the absence of any violation of Section 78(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 regarding utilization of the share premium account. The Assessing Officer's failure to distinguish between creation of share premium and utilization of funds was affirmed. Consequently, no interference was warranted with the HC order, and the addition to income was disallowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.