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...
AT allowed the appeal in part, holding that the trustees, not the investment advisor, bear primary responsibility to effectuate the trust purpose and to wind up the schemes under Section 15 of the Indian Trust Act. The Tribunal confirmed that Schemes I, II and IV remained unwound and upheld SEBI's finding of contravention of the VCF Regulations; however, having regard to the appellants' status as senior citizens and attachment of the fund's assets by the Enforcement Directorate, the AT reduced the monetary sanction. The Tribunal directed a consolidated penalty of Rs.2,00,000 each to be imposed on the three appellants in respect of the non-winding up, and otherwise affirmed the regulatory determination.
AT allowed the appeal in part, holding that the trustees, not the investment advisor, bear primary responsibility to effectuate the trust purpose and to wind up the schemes under Section 15 of the Indian Trust Act. The Tribunal confirmed that Schemes I, II and IV remained unwound and upheld SEBI's finding of contravention of the VCF Regulations; however, having regard to the appellants' status as senior citizens and attachment of the fund's assets by the Enforcement Directorate, the AT reduced the monetary sanction. The Tribunal directed a consolidated penalty of Rs.2,00,000 each to be imposed on the three appellants in respect of the non-winding up, and otherwise affirmed the regulatory determination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.