The Tribunal held that meetings of shareholders and creditors were unnecessary where the transferor was a wholly owned subsidiary, no new shares were to be issued, and no compromise with stakeholders was proposed. The first motion application was accordingly allowed.
The Tribunal held that whether acts of oppression or mismanagement are established can only be determined after a full adjudication on merits. Such issues cannot be decided at the threshold stage of dismissal proceedings.
The Tribunal held that equal shareholding coupled with non-cooperation had resulted in complete deadlock in the company’s affairs. To bring an end to the oppression, it directed the respondent to transfer her shares at nil value.
The Tribunal held that the proposed reduction would not adversely affect the company’s ability to meet its liabilities. It approved the scheme after finding that creditors’ interests remained protected.
The Tribunal held that the proposed Section 339 relief flowed directly from the SFIO investigation report forming the basis of the existing petition. The amendment was permitted to enable comprehensive adjudication of the alleged fraud.
The Delhi ITAT sustained the addition arising from the sale of listed shares after finding discrepancies in purchase records, including contradictory sale notes and payment receipts. The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of the underlying share transactions.
ITAT Lucknow held that derivative losses incurred by a spouse using funds gifted by the assessee can be clubbed and set off under Section 64(1)(iv). The matter was remanded to verify the actual quantum of eligible losses.
The Telangana High Court granted bail to an accused in a Rs.30 crore fake GST ITC case after noting that no complaint had been filed despite 60 days of custody. The Court also considered the maximum punishment prescribed and imposed conditions while granting relief.
The Delhi ITAT held that where purchases are reflected in accepted sales and closing stock, the entire purchase amount cannot be disallowed. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to the gross profit element by applying the average GP ratio of the preceding five years.
The Delhi ITAT held that repeated non-compliance with statutory notices transformed the reassessment into a best judgment assessment in substance. Consequently, the CIT(A) was justified in remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
