https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99660 An agreement conferring extensive operational powers on Kamala Mills Ltd. did not make it the assessee's manager, because the essential statutory element of subjection to the board's superintendence, control and direction was absent; the dominant object of the arrangement was financing and enabling the business to run, so section 384 of the Companies Act, 1956 was not attracted. As the remuneration paid under that arrangement was not in violation of section 384, it was not illegal expenditure on that ground and was deductible as business expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. en-us Wed, 19 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jan 2018 18:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99660 An agreement conferring extensive operational powers on Kamala Mills Ltd. did not make it the assessee's manager, because the essential statutory element of subjection to the board's superintendence, control and direction was absent; the dominant object of the arrangement was financing and enabling the business to run, so section 384 of the Companies Act, 1956 was not attracted. As the remuneration paid under that arrangement was not in violation of section 384, it was not illegal expenditure on that ground and was deductible as business expenditure under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 19 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99660