Protects Hawkins' registered label, an attractive 'artistic work'; Penalizes infringer
HC grants permanent injunction, penalizes defendant for wrongful & illegal application of Hawkins Cooker Ltd's (plaintiff) label design on its pressure cooker, thereby infringing plaintiff's copyright; Holds plaintiff's registered label design, i.e. two red semi-circles with a white patch in between and white highlight all round as an 'attractive get-up'; Observes that use of same colour combination, get-up and layout by defendant on its product is sufficient to pass off its goods as that of plaintiff's, applies an average man's intelligence; Rejects defendant's reliance on Sec. 15 of Copyright Act, 1957 to contend that since plaintiff's logo has been produced more than fifty times by a mechanical process, it does not enjoy the copyright protection; Holds that the alleged label was an 'artistic work' and Sec. 15 applies to copyright in industrial designs and "does not prevent the owner of copyright in claiming exclusivity of any artistic work or label"; Further rejects defendant's submission that similar logos are used by other pressure cooker manufacturers and manufacturers of other products, absent proof; Relies on SC observations in Sait Tarajee Khimchand & Ors. v Yelamarti Satyam & Ors., Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions (P) Ltd.:Calcutta HC
Restrains YouTube from telecasting famous filmmakers' professional journey movie; Protects copyright infringement
HC grants interlocutory injunction to Indian Independent Filmmakers Worldwide Association's ('plaintiff') against YouTube for infringing its copyright by broadcasting cinematographic content of plaintiff's film; Plaintiff's cinematographic film 'Season 2 of IIFW MASTERCLASS' depicted reputed filmmakers' professional journey, and YouTube had uploaded and broadcasted an episode relating to interview of famous filmmakers, Sudhir Mishra & Rajkumar Hirani; Thus, HC issues cease and desist order restraining You Tube from exhibiting/ transmitting the cinematographic content in which plaintiff owned copyright; Observes that FICCI had permitted plaintiff to exclusively record its season, and in absence of show cause by You Tube as to why it should not be refrained from showing plaintiff's cinematographic content, holds "a prima-facie case of copyright infringement is made out by the Plaintiff":Bombay HC
Directs Registrar to expunge respondent's 'trademark', as applicant 'prior adopter and user'
IPAB directs Registrar of Trade Marks to expunge respondent's trade mark 'PRIME' from Trade Marks register, as applicant 'prior adopter and user' of the mark for similar product; Observes that the documents on record proved that applicant used the trademark since 1983, however, respondent failed to prove that it started using the mark even from 2000, as claimed by it, thus rejects respondent's 'honest concurrent user' plea; Further rejects respondent's contention that it used the mark only for HDPE pipes unlike applicant who used it for plastic pipes, observes that "any type of pipes manufactured under the name and style as 'PRIME\' would certainly create chaos and confusion among the consumers"; Relies on Madras HC Division Bench ruling whereby injunction was granted to applicant against respondent for the use of similar trademark; Concludes that, "In view of the clear and categorical findings of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras to the effect that both the parties are manufacturing pipes under the impugned trade mark "PRIME", preference should be given to the prior user and adopter":Chennai IPAB
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
4th Floor, Prathishtha Bhavan, 101 Maharshi Karwe Marg,Mumbai – 400 020
20th May, 2015.
ORDER
All applications for adjournment shall be filed atleast three weeks in advance, except in exceptional cases for which reasons for filing them beyond that period shall be clearly stated in the application. The application will be filed in duplicate and the copy served in advance on the opposite party. In case the opposite party writes "not opposed" on the application, it shall be taken up in Chamber, otherwise, all applications shall be listed before the Court along with the case. All applications shall clearly state the grounds on which adjournment is sought and shall be supported by an affidavit of the party seeking adjournment.
Sdl-
[Justice (Retd.) Dev Darshan Sud]
President
President
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
4th Floor, Prathishtha Bhavan, 101 Maharshi Karwe Marg,
Mumbai – 400 020
4th Floor, Prathishtha Bhavan, 101 Maharshi Karwe Marg,
Mumbai – 400 020
14th May, 2015.
ORDER
Henceforth all appeals filed in the Tribunal by the Department or assessee shall contain:
(a) Index sheet clearly indicating the documents filed.
(b) Appeal paper book shall be paged in continuation.
Sdl-
[Justice (Retd.) Dev Darshan Sud]
President
President
CCI proposes M&A cases e-filing; Crowd-funding regulations on back burner; IPRs likely in Class-IX curriculum
New ITAT Rules For Filing Appeals And Seeking Adjournment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
4th Floor, Prathishtha Bhavan, 101 Maharshi Karwe Marg,
Mumbai – 400 020
20th May, 2015.
ORDER
All applications for adjournment shall be filed atleast three weeks in advance, except in exceptional cases for which reasons for filing them beyond that period shall be clearly stated in the application. The application will be filed in duplicate and the copy served in advance on the opposite party. In case the opposite party writes "not opposed" on the application, it shall be taken up in Chamber, otherwise, all applications shall be listed before the Court along with the case. All applications shall clearly state the grounds on which adjournment is sought and shall be supported by an affidavit of the party seeking adjournment.
Sdl-
[Justice (Retd.) Dev Darshan Sud]
President
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
4th Floor, Prathishtha Bhavan, 101 Maharshi Karwe Marg,
Mumbai – 400 020
14th May, 2015.
ORDER
Henceforth all appeals filed in the Tribunal by the Department or assessee shall contain:
(a) Index sheet clearly indicating the documents filed.
(b) Appeal paper book shall be paged in continuation.
Sdl-
[Justice (Retd.) Dev Darshan Sud]
President
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
4th Floor, Prathishtha Bhavan, 101 Maharshi Karwe Marg,
Mumbai – 400 020
20th May, 2015.
ORDER
All applications for adjournment shall be filed atleast three weeks in advance, except in exceptional cases for which reasons for filing them beyond that period shall be clearly stated in the application. The application will be filed in duplicate and the copy served in advance on the opposite party. In case the opposite party writes "not opposed" on the application, it shall be taken up in Chamber, otherwise, all applications shall be listed before the Court along with the case. All applications shall clearly state the grounds on which adjournment is sought and shall be supported by an affidavit of the party seeking adjournment.
Sdl-
[Justice (Retd.) Dev Darshan Sud]
President
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
4th Floor, Prathishtha Bhavan, 101 Maharshi Karwe Marg,
Mumbai – 400 020
14th May, 2015.
ORDER
Henceforth all appeals filed in the Tribunal by the Department or assessee shall contain:
(a) Index sheet clearly indicating the documents filed.
(b) Appeal paper book shall be paged in continuation.
Sdl-
[Justice (Retd.) Dev Darshan Sud]
President
| | | |
| | |
BCC
djshah1944@yahoo.com
May 21 at 7:49 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Click to Reply All |
| |
| |
| |
Govt. designates 5th Special Court, Calcutta as 'Special Court' under SEBI Act, Securities Contract (Regulation) Act and Depositories Act.
Click here to read more.
Govt. designates Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai as 'Special Court' under Securities Laws
Govt. designates 39th Sessions Court, City Civil Court, Greater Mumbai as the Special Court under the SEBI Act, Securities Contract (Regulation) Act and Depositories Act.
Click here to read more.
Cabinet approves 'NRI' definition expansion, investments to be deemed domestic investment
Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister, approves to review FDI Policy on investments by Non-Resident Indians (NRIs), Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs) and Overseas Citizens of India (OCIs); Cabinet approves amending the definition of 'NRI' to mean an individual resident outside India, who is citizen of India or is an OCI cardholder within meaning of Citizenship Act and POIs cardholders are deemed to be OCI cardholders; Approves addition of new paragraph in FDI policy, whereby investment by NRIs will be deemed to be 'domestic investment' at par with the investment made by residents; States that such measure is expected to result in increased investments across sectors and greater inflow of foreign exchange remittance leading to economic growth: PIB
Dear Sirs,
Unconditional exemption of income under Section 10 and no statutory liability to file return of income under Section 139- NO TDS- SEE CIRCULAR NO.7
Unconditional exemption of income under Section 10 and no statutory liability to file return of income under Section 139- NO TDS- SEE CIRCULAR NO.7
PFA
Belated claim on grandfather's legacy not entitled to Sec. 35 protection
HC restrains Ram Education Trust (defendant) to construct school under name & style of 'SHRI RAM', as it is similar to SRF Foundation's (plaintiff) The SHRI RAM SCHOOL (estd in 1988); Founders of plaintiff and defendant were real brothers and grandsons of Shri Ram, who has reputed educational institutions such as Shri Ram College of Commerce (in 1926) and Lady Shri Ram College (in 1956) in Delhi; Thus, defendant contended that 'SHRI RAM' being name of their grandfather, plaintiff could not claim monopoly and relied on Sec 35 of Trademarks Act (that protects bona fide use by a person of his own name against proprietor or registered user of a registered trade mark); Rejecting such contention, HC holds that Sec 35 cannot be read blindly to entitle a party to use his own name, surname in respect of same goods and services and notes that use of name should be bonafide; Observes that defendant's use of the mark in 2011, after 23 years, was not bonafide, as it was intended to make use of plaintiff's goodwill; Notes that though grandfather of founders of plaintiff & defendant was involved in education field bearing mark SHRI RAM prior to plaintiff's schools but, no school was run on commercial scale, and states that there would be no objection if defendant would claim legacy of grandfather Sir Shri Ram in relation to other activities of education except for running the school; However, HC allows defendant to continue its existing school SHRI RAM GLOBAL PRE SCHOOL with a disclaimer that it has no connection with plaintiff, observes that "balance has to be strike down..otherwise, great hardship would not only cause to the defendant but also to the students and their family; Relies on SC observations in Mahendra & Mahendra Paper Mills Ltd. v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., Dalpat Kumar vs. Prahlad Singh:Delhi HC
Narayana Murthy heads panel on start-ups; Airlines again under CCI scanner; RBI hints at simplified forex rules
Narayana Murthy heads panel on start-ups; Airlines again under CCI scanner; RBI hints at simplified forex rules
Dear Patrons,
If you have missed any of our updates on corporate laws, competition law or intellectual property laws, for the months of March & April 2015, here is a chance to catch up with all of them at one place. We are glad to present to you our Newsletter for March & April that will surely grab your attention.
Click here to read LSI Monthly Newsletter, March & April 2015.
Best Regards,
LSI Team
MUMBAI, MAY 22, 2015: THE issue before the Bench is - Whether sum receivedafter tripartite agreement is to be taxed as capital gains when assessee is engaged in such activity with respect to only one property. YES is the answer.
Facts of the case
The assessee is a manufacturer of textiles. The assessee was allotted a plot of land on lease by CIDCO with a specific condition that the plot must be used for construction of office building only. Therefore, when this agreement was executed and possession was taken the intention was to construct a corporate office. However, for more than 10 years it could not set up a corporate office and, therefore, an application was made to the CIDCO to consider the change of user to residential-cum-commercial complex. The CIDCO granted permission and it was subject to the condition that construction should be done within two years otherwise a penalty would be imposed by CIDCO. Thereafter application was made to the CIDCO for grant of permission to assign these leasehold rights in the plot to the buyer, which was accordingly granted. During assessment, the Revenue held that the gains derived by the assessee from such transaction and which was tripartite in nature was adventure in the nature of trade.
However, the Tribunal following the Supreme court judgement held that the gains derived by the assessee from the transaction was capital gains and not an adventure in the nature of trade.
On appeal, the HC held that,
++ it is in this overall perspective that the Tribunal considered the matter. It applied the relevant tests and as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of G. Venkataswami Naidu and reaffirmed later. The Tribunal concluded that having regard to these tests, it is clear that a solitary or single transaction may be termed as adventure in the nature of trade even though the assessee, in a normal course, is not engaged in such business. But there is no formula and which can be applied generally. Ordinarily an isolated transaction cannot be the sole criterion to test as to whether it is in the nature of trade or sale of investment. A holistic and overall view of the transaction has to be taken;
++ upon finding that the plot was allotted but could not be utilized by manufacturer of cotton and yarn that the subsequent developments took place. It is only in the year 2005 and for the first time the assignment of leasehold interest took place. It was not a sale or transfer of property by the assessee for a profit but since use could not be made, that initially a conversion permission was sought but even thereafter a utilization of the property for the assessee's purpose did not come through. It is in these circumstances that the assignment with the consent of CIDCO has taken place. Therefore, the Tribunal termed that the amount received pursuant to the tripartite agreement is assessable to tax under the head "Capital Gains" only. The reasons assigned in the order under challenge and particularly that the revenue did not set up a case that the assessee was engaged in such activity in respect of any other piece of land or property that the single or isolated transaction was not termed as an adventure in the nature of trade. To our mind, such conclusion arrived at and consistent with the factual data does not raise any substantial questions of law.
(See 2015-TIOL-1304-HC-MUM-IT)
Business Income—Deduction—Allowability—Funding of interest by term loan vis a vis Actual payment—Assessee was heavily indebted to its institutional creditors—ICICI was lead manager of those creditors—Accumulated interest on the overdue principal had mounted to Rs.3,00,14,900—Assessee was unable to discharge this interest liability due to its financial hardship—ICICI waived a part of compound interest together with the commitment charges and agreed to accept 3,00,149 convertible debentures of Rs.100 each, amounting to Rs.3,00,14,900 in lieu of the outstanding interest—Consequently, assessee issued debentures in favour of ICICI—Assessee claimed that interest of Rs.2,84,71,384 was deductible—AO was of view that debenture issue resulted only in postponement of interest liability and that the interest could not be considered as having been "actually paid" as required by Section to qualify for relief—He disallowed assessee's claim—CIT(A) on appeal, directed AO to allow deduction—ITAT upheld order of CIT(A)—Held, ICICI, IDBI and IFCI would also constitute public financial institutions for purposes of Section 43B and interest on loan taken by assessee from these entities would fall within the purview of Section 43B(d)—Explanation 3C, having retrospective effect with effect from 01.04.1989, would be applicable to present case—Explanation 3C squarely covers issue raised in this appeal, as it negates assessee's contention that interest which has been converted into a loan is deemed to be actually paid—In light of insertion of this explanation, which was not present at the time impugned order was passed, assessee cannot claim deduction u/s 43B—Thus, issue answered in favour of revenue—Revenue's appeal allowed
Dear Patrons,
In the recent landmark judgment in Madras Bar Association Vs Union of India & Anr. [LSI-486-SC-2015-(NDEL)], the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench upheld the validity of National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') / National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') under the Companies Act, 2013. However, it struck down the validity of Technical Member appointment & Selection Committee constitution.
In this article, Mr. Mahesh A. Athavale (Company Secretary and Partner, KANJ & Associates) analyses the SC ruling and states that the ruling is a welcome step "as it will reduce the burden of the Supreme Court, High Courts and CLBs on the corporate law related matters, which will ultimately help in unlocking the value of distressed assets".
The author further points out that formation of NCLT/NCLAT will widen opportunities for practicing professionals too, as post Tribunals formation practicing Chartered Accountants/Company Secretaries/Cost Accountants would be able to represent their client companies in matters like - mergers and amalgamations, revival of sick companies, shareholders-management dispute matters etc. Thus, the author states that practicing professionals will now have to take some extra efforts for enhancing their skill sets. He opines that they need to develop the art of advocacy & soft skill and have basic knowledge of tax laws, accounting treatments in corporate restructuring etc.
Click here to read the article - 'SC clears NCLAT roadblocks - Can professionals cash in?'
Best Regards,
LSI Team
| | |
| | |
BCC
djshah1944@yahoo.com
May 21 at 7:49 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Click to Reply All |
| |
| |
| |
Govt. designates 5th Special Court, Calcutta as 'Special Court' under SEBI Act, Securities Contract (Regulation) Act and Depositories Act.
Click here to read more.
Govt. designates Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai as 'Special Court' under Securities Laws
Govt. designates 39th Sessions Court, City Civil Court, Greater Mumbai as the Special Court under the SEBI Act, Securities Contract (Regulation) Act and Depositories Act.
Click here to read more.
Cabinet approves 'NRI' definition expansion, investments to be deemed domestic investment
Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister, approves to review FDI Policy on investments by Non-Resident Indians (NRIs), Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs) and Overseas Citizens of India (OCIs); Cabinet approves amending the definition of 'NRI' to mean an individual resident outside India, who is citizen of India or is an OCI cardholder within meaning of Citizenship Act and POIs cardholders are deemed to be OCI cardholders; Approves addition of new paragraph in FDI policy, whereby investment by NRIs will be deemed to be 'domestic investment' at par with the investment made by residents; States that such measure is expected to result in increased investments across sectors and greater inflow of foreign exchange remittance leading to economic growth: PIB
Dear Sirs,
Unconditional exemption of income under Section 10 and no statutory liability to file return of income under Section 139- NO TDS- SEE CIRCULAR NO.7
Unconditional exemption of income under Section 10 and no statutory liability to file return of income under Section 139- NO TDS- SEE CIRCULAR NO.7
PFA
Belated claim on grandfather's legacy not entitled to Sec. 35 protection
HC restrains Ram Education Trust (defendant) to construct school under name & style of 'SHRI RAM', as it is similar to SRF Foundation's (plaintiff) The SHRI RAM SCHOOL (estd in 1988); Founders of plaintiff and defendant were real brothers and grandsons of Shri Ram, who has reputed educational institutions such as Shri Ram College of Commerce (in 1926) and Lady Shri Ram College (in 1956) in Delhi; Thus, defendant contended that 'SHRI RAM' being name of their grandfather, plaintiff could not claim monopoly and relied on Sec 35 of Trademarks Act (that protects bona fide use by a person of his own name against proprietor or registered user of a registered trade mark); Rejecting such contention, HC holds that Sec 35 cannot be read blindly to entitle a party to use his own name, surname in respect of same goods and services and notes that use of name should be bonafide; Observes that defendant's use of the mark in 2011, after 23 years, was not bonafide, as it was intended to make use of plaintiff's goodwill; Notes that though grandfather of founders of plaintiff & defendant was involved in education field bearing mark SHRI RAM prior to plaintiff's schools but, no school was run on commercial scale, and states that there would be no objection if defendant would claim legacy of grandfather Sir Shri Ram in relation to other activities of education except for running the school; However, HC allows defendant to continue its existing school SHRI RAM GLOBAL PRE SCHOOL with a disclaimer that it has no connection with plaintiff, observes that "balance has to be strike down..otherwise, great hardship would not only cause to the defendant but also to the students and their family; Relies on SC observations in Mahendra & Mahendra Paper Mills Ltd. v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., Dalpat Kumar vs. Prahlad Singh:Delhi HC
Narayana Murthy heads panel on start-ups; Airlines again under CCI scanner; RBI hints at simplified forex rules
Narayana Murthy heads panel on start-ups; Airlines again under CCI scanner; RBI hints at simplified forex rules
Dear Patrons,
If you have missed any of our updates on corporate laws, competition law or intellectual property laws, for the months of March & April 2015, here is a chance to catch up with all of them at one place. We are glad to present to you our Newsletter for March & April that will surely grab your attention.
Click here to read LSI Monthly Newsletter, March & April 2015.
Best Regards,
LSI Team
MUMBAI, MAY 22, 2015: THE issue before the Bench is - Whether sum receivedafter tripartite agreement is to be taxed as capital gains when assessee is engaged in such activity with respect to only one property. YES is the answer.
Facts of the case
The assessee is a manufacturer of textiles. The assessee was allotted a plot of land on lease by CIDCO with a specific condition that the plot must be used for construction of office building only. Therefore, when this agreement was executed and possession was taken the intention was to construct a corporate office. However, for more than 10 years it could not set up a corporate office and, therefore, an application was made to the CIDCO to consider the change of user to residential-cum-commercial complex. The CIDCO granted permission and it was subject to the condition that construction should be done within two years otherwise a penalty would be imposed by CIDCO. Thereafter application was made to the CIDCO for grant of permission to assign these leasehold rights in the plot to the buyer, which was accordingly granted. During assessment, the Revenue held that the gains derived by the assessee from such transaction and which was tripartite in nature was adventure in the nature of trade.
However, the Tribunal following the Supreme court judgement held that the gains derived by the assessee from the transaction was capital gains and not an adventure in the nature of trade.
On appeal, the HC held that,
++ it is in this overall perspective that the Tribunal considered the matter. It applied the relevant tests and as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of G. Venkataswami Naidu and reaffirmed later. The Tribunal concluded that having regard to these tests, it is clear that a solitary or single transaction may be termed as adventure in the nature of trade even though the assessee, in a normal course, is not engaged in such business. But there is no formula and which can be applied generally. Ordinarily an isolated transaction cannot be the sole criterion to test as to whether it is in the nature of trade or sale of investment. A holistic and overall view of the transaction has to be taken;
++ upon finding that the plot was allotted but could not be utilized by manufacturer of cotton and yarn that the subsequent developments took place. It is only in the year 2005 and for the first time the assignment of leasehold interest took place. It was not a sale or transfer of property by the assessee for a profit but since use could not be made, that initially a conversion permission was sought but even thereafter a utilization of the property for the assessee's purpose did not come through. It is in these circumstances that the assignment with the consent of CIDCO has taken place. Therefore, the Tribunal termed that the amount received pursuant to the tripartite agreement is assessable to tax under the head "Capital Gains" only. The reasons assigned in the order under challenge and particularly that the revenue did not set up a case that the assessee was engaged in such activity in respect of any other piece of land or property that the single or isolated transaction was not termed as an adventure in the nature of trade. To our mind, such conclusion arrived at and consistent with the factual data does not raise any substantial questions of law.
(See 2015-TIOL-1304-HC-MUM-IT)
Business Income—Deduction—Allowability—Funding of interest by term loan vis a vis Actual payment—Assessee was heavily indebted to its institutional creditors—ICICI was lead manager of those creditors—Accumulated interest on the overdue principal had mounted to Rs.3,00,14,900—Assessee was unable to discharge this interest liability due to its financial hardship—ICICI waived a part of compound interest together with the commitment charges and agreed to accept 3,00,149 convertible debentures of Rs.100 each, amounting to Rs.3,00,14,900 in lieu of the outstanding interest—Consequently, assessee issued debentures in favour of ICICI—Assessee claimed that interest of Rs.2,84,71,384 was deductible—AO was of view that debenture issue resulted only in postponement of interest liability and that the interest could not be considered as having been "actually paid" as required by Section to qualify for relief—He disallowed assessee's claim—CIT(A) on appeal, directed AO to allow deduction—ITAT upheld order of CIT(A)—Held, ICICI, IDBI and IFCI would also constitute public financial institutions for purposes of Section 43B and interest on loan taken by assessee from these entities would fall within the purview of Section 43B(d)—Explanation 3C, having retrospective effect with effect from 01.04.1989, would be applicable to present case—Explanation 3C squarely covers issue raised in this appeal, as it negates assessee's contention that interest which has been converted into a loan is deemed to be actually paid—In light of insertion of this explanation, which was not present at the time impugned order was passed, assessee cannot claim deduction u/s 43B—Thus, issue answered in favour of revenue—Revenue's appeal allowed
Dear Patrons,
In the recent landmark judgment in Madras Bar Association Vs Union of India & Anr. [LSI-486-SC-2015-(NDEL)], the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench upheld the validity of National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') / National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ('NCLAT') under the Companies Act, 2013. However, it struck down the validity of Technical Member appointment & Selection Committee constitution.
In this article, Mr. Mahesh A. Athavale (Company Secretary and Partner, KANJ & Associates) analyses the SC ruling and states that the ruling is a welcome step "as it will reduce the burden of the Supreme Court, High Courts and CLBs on the corporate law related matters, which will ultimately help in unlocking the value of distressed assets".
The author further points out that formation of NCLT/NCLAT will widen opportunities for practicing professionals too, as post Tribunals formation practicing Chartered Accountants/Company Secretaries/Cost Accountants would be able to represent their client companies in matters like - mergers and amalgamations, revival of sick companies, shareholders-management dispute matters etc. Thus, the author states that practicing professionals will now have to take some extra efforts for enhancing their skill sets. He opines that they need to develop the art of advocacy & soft skill and have basic knowledge of tax laws, accounting treatments in corporate restructuring etc.
Click here to read the article - 'SC clears NCLAT roadblocks - Can professionals cash in?'
Best Regards,
LSI Team
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment