Summary of some key decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has been provided below. Arbitration Possible view by Arbitral Tribunal on construction of contractual terms cannot be substituted by High Court under Section 37(1)(c) of Arbitration Act The Supreme Court has discussed and summarised the principles applicable to a Court’s interference with an […]
Reality of moderation/scaling of marks under Regulation 39(2) in all levels of CA examinations by the ICAI The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, has provided the quintessential details and data in respect of the application of Regulation 39(2) of Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988 in CA Examinations, qua the following counts of information being sought […]
In the recent past, a few companies like Syngenta India Limited, Atlas Copco, etc. have, after their delisting from the stock exchanges, followed the Sec 66 of Companies Act, 2013 route to selectively reduce their non-promoter capital and provide a means of exit to minority shareholders.[1] Sec 66 allows a company to distinguish between shareholders […]
Dr. Sajan Hedge Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) Conclusion: Instead of quashing the entire reassessment proceedings, it was suffice if an opportunity was provided to assessee to submit additional objections, if any, based on the materials relied on by assessee to AO, within a stipulated period and on receipt of the same, AO should be […]
आपको ध्यान होगा हम पहले शेयरों की ट्रेडिंग भौतिक रूप में करते थे. हमें न केवल शेयर सर्टिफ़िकेट सम्हाल कर रखने पड़ते थे बल्कि इसके ट्रांसफर के लिए समय और अधिक पैसे स्टाम्प फीस के रूप में खर्च होते थे. शेयर गुमने, फटने और खराब हो जाने का डर अलग. साथ ही खरीद बेच के […]
NFRA has received 17 comment letters from Stakeholders, which includes important Industry Bodies, Large Accounting Firms and Research/Academia among others. Overall, stakeholders have expressed support for NFRA’s proposals to proactively promote stakeholder engagement.
DCIT Vs Jaguar Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) We find that there is no dispute that the assessee has received share application money from six companies, out of which, from three companies assessee has received premium for sums aggregating to Rs.103,80,00,000/-. In the case of Ganesh Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Feelgood Creation Pvt. Ltd., and Beyond […]
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court dismissed the writ petition by making observations that the due procedure of law was followed by the Respondents under Section of the 24(4)(a)(i) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016.
In present facts of the case the Hon’ble Tribunal gave directions to dispose of the refund applications within 3 months after the filing of new refund application on the basis of observations made on procedure of refund applications.
The present appeal was filed against the Order of the Single Judge of the Hon’ble Madras High Court, wherein the Writ was allowed by stating that the request of cross examination shall not be denied, but in Appeal the Division Bench allowed the appeal of Revenue and have sustained the Order of Revenue for denial for cross examination due to availability of alternative remedy.
