Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The text addresses diversion of funds raised by preferential allotment and concludes that post-facto shareholders' ratification cannot validate prior diversion or negate breaches of disclosure and market integrity norms. It states that diverting proceeds to loans and share investments, particularly when done immediately after receipt, constitutes fraud and unfair trade practice under PFUTP Regulations and related securities disclosure obligations, attracting liability. It further explains that interim protective directions and subsequent adjudicatory penalty proceedings can coexist and that an Adjudicating Officer may impose monetary penalties notwithstanding earlier protective orders; the AO's penalty order was accordingly restored.
The text addresses diversion of funds raised by preferential allotment and concludes that post-facto shareholders' ratification cannot validate prior diversion or negate breaches of disclosure and market integrity norms. It states that diverting proceeds to loans and share investments, particularly when done immediately after receipt, constitutes fraud and unfair trade practice under PFUTP Regulations and related securities disclosure obligations, attracting liability. It further explains that interim protective directions and subsequent adjudicatory penalty proceedings can coexist and that an Adjudicating Officer may impose monetary penalties notwithstanding earlier protective orders; the AO's penalty order was accordingly restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.