Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Section 37A could be invoked on a continuing contravention that extended beyond its insertion, and the appeal was maintainable by the Union of India as an aggrieved person through an authorised officer. The Tribunal held that false answers in ODI filings could not be excused by later form changes, and that protective seizure under Section 37A was wrongly set aside on that basis. It also found the Competent Authority's acceptance of step-down subsidiary reporting compliance and bona fide use of ODI funds to be perverse for want of supporting material. Alleged denial of natural justice was rejected because the respondent had received summons, filed replies, and obtained further time. The impugned order was set aside and the seizure restored.
Section 37A could be invoked on a continuing contravention that extended beyond its insertion, and the appeal was maintainable by the Union of India as an aggrieved person through an authorised officer. The Tribunal held that false answers in ODI filings could not be excused by later form changes, and that protective seizure under Section 37A was wrongly set aside on that basis. It also found the Competent Authority's acceptance of step-down subsidiary reporting compliance and bona fide use of ODI funds to be perverse for want of supporting material. Alleged denial of natural justice was rejected because the respondent had received summons, filed replies, and obtained further time. The impugned order was set aside and the seizure restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.