Govt. may not propose stringent timelines in Arbitration law; Airbus wins patent for hypersonic plane
Govt. may not propose stringent timelines in Arbitration law; Airbus wins patent for hypersonic plane
Share transmission refusal to legal heir oppressive; Notice serving to 'watchman' void
CLB allows petition u/s 58 and 59 of Companies Act, 2013 (share registration and rectification of members' register) and Sec 397/398 petition, dismisses respondents' (co. and its directors) challenge to maintainability of Sec 397/398 petition; Directs rectification of members' register as petitioner was entitled to 1/5th of shares held by his deceased mother in respondent co., holds that respondents have without sufficient cause refused share transmission and such refusal amounts to oppression; Accepts petitioner's contention that rights and obligations between co. and shareholders are governed by Articles of Association which provides for 'succession of shares', holds that transmission is governed by applicable Articles and not in manner of 'tenants in common acquire rights'; Sets aside special resolution passed for increasing authorized share capital of respondent co., notes that the notice of general meeting was served on the watchman of petitioner's building and not to petitioner, terms general meeting as 'bad in law, non-est and void'; Observes that directors' were appointed with retrospective effect (in year 2010), whereas forms were filed with MCA in 2013 i.e. after the death of petitioner's mother, and also the minutes of meetings & resolutions were neither produced before RoC nor before CLB; Discusses law for maintainability of Sec 397/398 petition, observes that respondents' actions were burdensome, harsh, lacking probity and fair dealing, appoints Chartered Accountant firm as 'Special Auditor' for conducting audit and finding out whether funds were diverted / misappropriated:Mumbai CLB
Order was passed by Shri A.K. Tripathi, Judicial Member, CLB
Advocates Zal Andhyarujina, Sujit Lahoti, Shruti Sardesai, Abhay Jadeja represented the petitioner and Senior Advocate Gaurav Joshi, Advocates Amrut Joshi, Salonee Kulkarni, Sagar Divekar, Aparna Suresh represented the Respondents.
19 big projects totaling Rs. 30,000cr investment under consideration; Sector wise FDI statistics released
Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister of State (Independent Charge). Commerce & Industry presents sector-wise information on FDI equity flow received during Financial Year 2015-2016 (up to May, 2015); Computer software & hardware sector has received highest FDI amounting to USD 2,273.13 million, whereas Automobile industry has received FDI amounting to USD 1,006.84 million; States that the proposals for big investments pertain to pharmaceuticals, information & broadcasting, insurance, NBFCs, private banks and other financial sectors; States that 19-proposals of big investments, each in excess of Rs. 100 crores are under Govt.'s consideration and estimated investment for these proposals is Rs. 30,552.45 crores: PIB
Click here to read more.
Industry Minister clarifies on FDI in e-commerce, retail trading
Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister of State (Independent Charge) Commerce & Industry in a reply to question in Rajya Sabha states that Govt. has taken steps for effective expansion and foreign investment promotion of e-commerce, which includes FDI policy allowing FDI upto 100% under automatic route in B2B e-commerce activities; States that 100% FDI is permitted under automatic route only in B2B e-commerce activities, clarifies that FDI is also not permitted in retail trading, in any form, by means of e-commerce, for cos. engaged in activity of single/multi brand retail trading: PIB
Click here to read more.
Minister emphasizes India's liberal foreign policy regime, investor friendly FDI policy
Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister of State (Independent Charge). Commerce & Industry in a reply to question in Rajya Sabha states that India has one of the most liberalized FDI policy regimes in the world; States that Govt. of India has put in place an investor-friendly FDI policy, wherein 100% FDI under automatic route is permitted in most sectors/activities and significant changes are made in the FDI-policy regime from time to time; States that the Govt. has undertaken numerous steps for improving 'ease of doing business in India', wherein Ministries and State Governments are advised to simplify and rationalize regulatory environment through business process re-engineering and use of information technology; States that these measures are expected to increase FDI, which complements and supplements domestic investment, wherein domestic cos. are benefited through FDI, by way of enhanced access to supplementary capital and state-of-art-technologies, exposure to global managerial practices; States that FDI is matter of private business decisions and global investors take time to assess new policy, its implications before making investment: PIB
Click here to read more.
Sitharaman explains Govt.'s active role in promoting foreign investment in India
Nirmala Sitharaman clarifies that FDI policy is reviewed on an ongoing basis, for making it more investor friendly; Significant changes are made in FDI policy regime, from time to time, for ensuring that India remains increasingly attractive and investor-friendly; States that Govt. plays an active role in investment promotion, through dissemination of information on investment climate, opportunities in India and by advising prospective investors about investment policies, procedures & opportunities; States that FDI up to 100% is allowed under automatic route in most sectors subject to applicable laws and conditions: PIB
Click here to read more.
Attached Bhagwad Gita in two languages. Follow you will not encounter any problems in life. In short Author has written of whole Gita ...???!!! Do good in life and coming days , follow principle to help some one, no body will touch you in life. I am too small to tell the truth of life to those who are following their principles in life.
Great writers ,
Great writers ,
Shah D J
IT: Landing and parking charges payable by Airlines in respect of aircrafts are not for the 'use of land' per se but the charges are in respect of number of facilities provided by the Airport Authority of India. Thus, landing and parking charges payable by Airlines would attract TDS under Section 194C and not under Section 194-I.
Facts:
| (a) | The issue that was disputed in the instant case was as to whether landing and parking charges paid by Airlines would attract TDS under Section 194-I or under Section 194C of the income-tax Act ('the Act'). | |
| (b) | The High Court of Delhi in case of CIT v. Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. [2009] 180 Taxman 188 (Delhi) has held that landing and parking charges would attract TDS under Section 194-I of the Act. | |
| (c) | However, the Madras High Court in case of CIT v. Singapore Airlines Ltd. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 200 (Madras) has taken a contrary view the landing and parking charges would attract TDS under Section 194C. The two judgments are in conflict with each other and it has to be determined as to which judgment should be allowed to hold the field. |
The Supreme Court held as under:
(1) In the instant case, the Airlines are allowed to land and take-off their Aircrafts at Indira Gandhi International Airport ('IGIA') for which landing fee is charged. Likewise, they are allowed to park their Aircrafts at IGIA for which parking fee is charged. It is done under an agreement and/or arrangement with Airport Authority of India ('AAI'). The moot question is as to whether landing and take-off facilities on the one hand and parking facility on the other hand, would mean to 'use of land'.(2) In the opinion of the Delhi High Court (Supra) "when the wheels of an aircraft coming into an airport touch the surface of the airfield, use of the land of the airport immediately begins". Similarly, for parking the aircraft in that airport, there is use of the land. This is the basic, rather, the only reason given by the Delhi High Court in support of its conclusion that landing and parking charges would attract TDS under Section 194-I.(3) The Madras High Court (Supra) examined the matter keeping wider perspective in mind thereby encompassing the utilization of the airport providing the facility of landing and take-off of the airplanes and also parking facility. After taken into consideration these aspects, the Madras High Court came to the conclusion that the facility was not of 'use of land' per se but the charges on landing and take-off by AAI from these airlines were in respect of number of facilities provided by the AAI which was to be necessarily provided in compliance with the various international protocol. The charges, therefore, were not for land usage or area allotted simpliciter. These were the charges for various services provided.(4) We are convinced that the charges which are fixed by the AAI for landing and take-off services as well as for parking of arcrafts are not for the 'use of land'. That would be too simplistic an approach, ignoring other relevant details which would amply demonstrate that these charges are for services and facilities offered in connection with the aircraft operation at the airport. These services include providing of air traffic services, found safety services, aeronautical communication facilities, installation and maintenance of navigational aids and meteorological services at the airport.(5) Therefore, it is not mere use of land. On the contrary, it is the facilities that are to be compulsorily offered by the AAI in tune with the requirements of the protocol, which is the primary focus. For example, runways are not constructed like any ordinary roads. Special technology of different type is required for the construction of these runways for smooth landing and take-off of the aircarfts. Specialised kind of orientation and dimensions are needed for these runways which are prescribed with precision and those standards are to be adhered to. Further, there has to be proper runway lighting, runway safety are, runway markings etc.(6) Technological aspects of runways were emphasized to highlight the precision with which designing and engineering goes into making these runways to be fool proof for safety purposes. The purpose is to show that the AAI is providing all these facilities for landing and take-off of and aircraft and in this while process, 'use of the land' pails into insignificance. What is important is that the charge payable are for providing of these facilities.(7) Thus, it becomes very clear that the charges are not for use of land per se and, therefore, it cannot be treated as 'rent' within meaning of Section 194-I of the Act. Therefore, the view taken by the Madras High Court (Supra) is correct and the judgment of the Delhi High Court (Supra) is over-ruled.
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment