The investigation relating to the issuance of new Unified Access Services Licenses and subsequent allocation of 2G spectrum during 2008-09 has established commission of offences punishable U/s 120-B IPC read with Section 7/11 & 12 of PC Act, 1988 against the then Union Telecom Minister; two Directors of Mumbai-based private company who were also promoters of a Mumbai-based private Telecom company; two Directors of another Mumbai based private company; one Director of Mumbai based private film company and one Director and one partner of Chennai based private TV company are liable to be prosecuted.
The regulations governing mergers, acquisitions and combinations under the Competition Act would be finalised by May 1, and implemented from June 1, said Minister for Corporate Affairs, Murli Deora, here today. The revised draft of regulations is in the final stages and we expect the notification to be finalised by May 1,” he told reporters at an event organised by the Indian Merchants Chamber (IMC) here today.
New Delhi , 21-04-2011 The CBI has registered three cases against a local Recruiting Agent(Delhi-based); three private firms; the then certain officers of Protector of Emigrants and other private persons with regard to illegal human trafficking of Indian workers.
There have been a number of articles on the Cabinet Secretary’s report regarding tapping of telephones which appeared in some section of the media. It is important that the correct factual position is presented to the media. The provisions for authorization of interception are contained in Section 5(2) of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 read with Rule 419(A) of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951 as well as Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 read with Information Technology (Directions for Interception or Monitoring or Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Monday arrested sacked Commonwealth Games (CWG) Organizing Committee chairman Suresh Kalmadi in connection with his role in the AM Films and TSR scams. The arrest order was carried out after the CBI had questioned Kalmadi extensively on the two incidents, particularly on the documents relating to the two deals.
In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, (Central Board of Direct Taxes) number 80/2010, dated the 19th October, 2010, to be published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, section 3, sub-section (ii), in paragraph 1 for “annuity plan of the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited”, read “annuity plan of the TATA AIG Life Insurance Company.”
The Supreme Court will hear a petition tomorrow that seeks directions to market regulator Sebi to take action on the report of a high-powered committee which had probed the IPO scam of 2006 and NSDL’s role in it. A bench comprising Justices RV Raveendran and AK Patnaik will hear the petition.
Announcement containing certain extracts taken from a communication addressed by the ministry of corporate affairs to the three professional institutes namely, ICAI, ICWAI and ICSI on the steps to be taken in respect of “information” received against members/firms registered with the respective institutes
ITO (TDS-1), Ahmedabad v. Apollo Hospitals International Ltd – There are two types of agreements. One of the covenant is stated to be in the nature of employer/employee agreement and the other is stated to be FGC contract. The distinction between the two inter alia include: a) In case of the employee doctors, there is a list of allowances (basic, HRA, etc). The consultant doctors are paid a lumpsum fee. b) The employee doctors‟ agreement had a clause for leave entitlement unlike the FGC contract c) Employee doctors are not entitled for any other full time employment d) Consultant doctors were not employed by service rules but were expected to follow the code of conduct
With respect to the Scheme, the tax department had raised similar objections before the Gujarat High Court, which after considering the contentions of both, the tax department and the petitioner company had dismissed the petition thereon. The petitioner has filed an appeal against the order of the Gujarat High Court and the same is pending before the Division Bench. The Delhi High Court, contrary to the order of the Gujarat High Court, has relied on settled judicial precedents and has passed the order sanctioning the Scheme.
