Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The NCLAT upheld the NCLT's exercise of powers under Section 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, confirming the removal of the appellants from management due to prima facie evidence of oppression and mismanagement. The management was vested in Respondents No.1 and 2, who were granted a three-year period to run the company. Despite two years having elapsed, the respondents claim incomplete transfer of company records. Respondents No.1 and 2 have submitted an undertaking to clear the mortgage on company land by repaying loans to Respondent No.6 to facilitate project completion. The appellants' conduct-accepting funds from allottees between 2010 and 2014 without completing construction or repaying loans by 2018-was held against them. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the management transfer and rejecting the appellants' challenge.
The NCLAT upheld the NCLT's exercise of powers under Section 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, confirming the removal of the appellants from management due to prima facie evidence of oppression and mismanagement. The management was vested in Respondents No.1 and 2, who were granted a three-year period to run the company. Despite two years having elapsed, the respondents claim incomplete transfer of company records. Respondents No.1 and 2 have submitted an undertaking to clear the mortgage on company land by repaying loans to Respondent No.6 to facilitate project completion. The appellants' conduct-accepting funds from allottees between 2010 and 2014 without completing construction or repaying loans by 2018-was held against them. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the management transfer and rejecting the appellants' challenge.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
