Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Whether RBI's permission for allotment of shares to a non-resident against import of second-hand capital goods was legally infirm, including on an alleged FERA violation, was the dominant issue. The court held that the investment involved direct payment by the non-resident for imported machinery, with no foreign-exchange outflow by the company, and was expressly permissible on a non-repatriable basis under the applicable government directive; hence RBI's approval was valid. It further held that FERA had been repealed prior to the approval and, under FEMA, no RBI permission was required for such allotment; the "sunset" contention therefore did not arise. The intra-court appeal was dismissed - HC
Whether RBI's permission for allotment of shares to a non-resident against import of second-hand capital goods was legally infirm, including on an alleged FERA violation, was the dominant issue. The court held that the investment involved direct payment by the non-resident for imported machinery, with no foreign-exchange outflow by the company, and was expressly permissible on a non-repatriable basis under the applicable government directive; hence RBI's approval was valid. It further held that FERA had been repealed prior to the approval and, under FEMA, no RBI permission was required for such allotment; the "sunset" contention therefore did not arise. The intra-court appeal was dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.