Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
AT held that the company and its KMPs engaged in self-funding of preferential allotment in breach of s.77(2) Companies Act and Regulations 3,4(1) of the PFUTP Regulations, and that several allottee and conduit entities aided the scheme; the Tribunal found a proximate fund flow of Rs.3.42 crore originating from the company into preferential subscriptions and sustained liability for that quantum. However, AT accepted that conduit entities had received Rs.10.47 crore and that no sufficient linkage was established for the excess transfers; considering those facts and attendant evidence, AT allowed the appeal challenging the impugned penalties as applied jointly and severally to the appellants, while rejecting delay-based dismissal.
AT held that the company and its KMPs engaged in self-funding of preferential allotment in breach of s.77(2) Companies Act and Regulations 3,4(1) of the PFUTP Regulations, and that several allottee and conduit entities aided the scheme; the Tribunal found a proximate fund flow of Rs.3.42 crore originating from the company into preferential subscriptions and sustained liability for that quantum. However, AT accepted that conduit entities had received Rs.10.47 crore and that no sufficient linkage was established for the excess transfers; considering those facts and attendant evidence, AT allowed the appeal challenging the impugned penalties as applied jointly and severally to the appellants, while rejecting delay-based dismissal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
