https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100955 The court interpreted sections 309(1) and 310 of the Companies Act, 1956, clarifying that professional fees payable to a director who is also an advocate and solicitor do not constitute 'remuneration' under the Act once the Central Government affirms the director's qualifications. The court emphasized the distinction between remuneration and managerial remuneration, setting aside a condition imposed by the Central Government and ruling in favor of the petitioners, granting them relief without costs. en-us Fri, 29 Jun 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:53:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100955 The court interpreted sections 309(1) and 310 of the Companies Act, 1956, clarifying that professional fees payable to a director who is also an advocate and solicitor do not constitute 'remuneration' under the Act once the Central Government affirms the director's qualifications. The court emphasized the distinction between remuneration and managerial remuneration, setting aside a condition imposed by the Central Government and ruling in favor of the petitioners, granting them relief without costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 29 Jun 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100955