Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Employee conflict disclosures and investment restrictions expand with new recusal duties, post-employment limits, and compliance reporting requirement...
After repeal of SICA and failure to approach the NCLT within the...
SICA repeal and abatement of rehabilitation proceedings barred further control over company assets; illegal share allotments and sales were struck down.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
After repeal of SICA and failure to approach the NCLT within the statutory period, pending BIFR/AAIFR proceedings abated and the earlier BIFR winding-up recommendation revived. GDCL, having only management rights and no ownership, had no authority to control or alienate JUL or JAIL assets, and the fresh share allotments in JAIL to GDCL group companies were illegal. Unauthorized sales were not validated; completed sales of the Kanpur Jute Mill and two JAIL properties were left undisturbed, but the scrap sale was set aside with refund and interest. The Court rejected reliance on Article 142 and legitimate expectation, directed time-bound verification and payment of workers' and provident fund dues, and treated the pending winding-up petition as infructuous.
After repeal of SICA and failure to approach the NCLT within the statutory period, pending BIFR/AAIFR proceedings abated and the earlier BIFR winding-up recommendation revived. GDCL, having only management rights and no ownership, had no authority to control or alienate JUL or JAIL assets, and the fresh share allotments in JAIL to GDCL group companies were illegal. Unauthorized sales were not validated; completed sales of the Kanpur Jute Mill and two JAIL properties were left undisturbed, but the scrap sale was set aside with refund and interest. The Court rejected reliance on Article 142 and legitimate expectation, directed time-bound verification and payment of workers' and provident fund dues, and treated the pending winding-up petition as infructuous.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
