The Government of India has announced ‘Startup India’ initiative for creating a conducive environment for startups in India. The various Ministries of the Government of India have initiated a number of activities for the purpose. To bring uniformity in the identified enterprises, an entity shall be considered as a ‘startup’-
Department of Pharmaceuticals have been consulted who have clarified that this entry be interpreted as two specific entries containing finished dosage forms based upon either Omeprazole or Lansoprazole used as the Active Pharmaceuticals Ingredients rather than treating this entry as a formulated product containing both of these bulk drugs.
In exercise of the powers conferred under section 30 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992) read with section 13(8) and section 27(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, the Board hereby makes the following Regulations to further amend the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2009, namely:-
In exercise of the powers conferred under section 30 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992) read with section 13(8) and section 27(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, the Board hereby makes the following Regulations to further amend the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011, namely:-
Delhi High Court held In the case of DIT vs. New Skies Satellite BV that the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 (VCLT) is universally accepted as authoritatively laying down the principles governing the law of treaties.
Bombay High Court held In the case of CIT vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. Pvt. Ltd. that section 44B enacts special provisions for computing profits and gains of shipping business in case of non-residents and section 172 is enacted for the purpose of levy and recovery of tax in the case of any ship belonging to or chartered by a non-resident operated from India.
ITAT Mumbai held in the case DCIT vs. M/s. ACC Ltd. held that AO is duty bound to follow instruction of The CIT (A) being very senior officer of the Department who also also performs quasi judicial functions. The AO has all the rights to challenge the order of the CIT (A) before the appropriate judicial forum, but he is not authorized to disobey the directions given by the CIT (A).
ITAT Mumbai held in the case ITO vs. Smt. Sudha Brijratan Damani that in the case of CIT v. P.S. Jain & Co. (2011) 335 ITR 591, Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that by passage of time, money value has gone down, the cost of litigation expenses has gone up, the assessees on the file of the Departments
Ideal Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Although Section 153A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search, or other post-search material or information available with the AO which can be related to the evidence found
As per 196(3) No company shall appoint or continue the employment of any person as managing director, whole-time director or manager who is below the age to twenty-one years or has attained the age of seventy years
