Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1481 to 1500 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Vicarious liability under FEMA was sustained against the company and its managing director because the Managing Director's position supported attribution of the contravention, while the other two directors were treated as sleeping directors not involved in day-to-day affairs or signing the import documents, so they were not liable under Section 3(b) read with Section 42. On penalty, the Tribunal held that Section 13(1) prescribes only the maximum limit and leaves quantum to judicial discretion; considering mitigating circumstances and the pre-deposit already made through FDRs, it reduced the penalty on the company and its managing director to that extent, with accrued interest.
Vicarious liability under FEMA was sustained against the company and its managing director because the Managing Director's position supported attribution of the contravention, while the other two directors were treated as sleeping directors not involved in day-to-day affairs or signing the import documents, so they were not liable under Section 3(b) read with Section 42. On penalty, the Tribunal held that Section 13(1) prescribes only the maximum limit and leaves quantum to judicial discretion; considering mitigating circumstances and the pre-deposit already made through FDRs, it reduced the penalty on the company and its managing director to that extent, with accrued interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.