Business deductions and transfer pricing issues: tribunal treatment of software write-offs, donation receipts, warranty provisions, and related expens...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2921 to 2940 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT held that proceedings concerning an alleged company deposit under Sections 73(4) and 74(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 could be examined by the NCLT on their own merits despite pending probate proceedings, because the tribunal had jurisdiction over whether the deposit was made, the amount due, and its proper safekeeping. The earlier appellate order was confined to substitution of the deceased petitioner and did not bar adjudication of the deposit dispute. It further held that claimant-beneficiaries may prosecute limited protective proceedings for preservation of the estate before probate is granted, and that Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act does not bar such protective relief.
NCLAT held that proceedings concerning an alleged company deposit under Sections 73(4) and 74(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 could be examined by the NCLT on their own merits despite pending probate proceedings, because the tribunal had jurisdiction over whether the deposit was made, the amount due, and its proper safekeeping. The earlier appellate order was confined to substitution of the deceased petitioner and did not bar adjudication of the deposit dispute. It further held that claimant-beneficiaries may prosecute limited protective proceedings for preservation of the estate before probate is granted, and that Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act does not bar such protective relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
