Thursday, August 7, 2014

[aaykarbhavan] Fw: Ca Next Step Newsletter (07/08/2014), Judgments and Information , CLI Company Cases, [5 Attachments]







2014-TIOL-502-ITAT-AGRA
DCIT Vs Kalyani Chaturvedi
Income Tax - Section 153A - Whether the concluded issues in the original assessment, which have already been passed on to the date of initiation of search & seizure operation u/s 132, can be re-agitated in search assessment u/s 153A when no material relating to such issues has been found during search. - Revenue's appeal dismissed : AGRA ITAT

SEc. 80-IB(10) stipulating furnishing of completion certificate of housing project is applicable prospectively

August 7, 2014[2014] 47 taxmann.com 161 (Hyderabad - Trib.)
IT : Law requiring furnishing of completion certificate in respect of a housing project was brought into statute only with effect from 1-4-2005, hence, would apply prospectively
 

Sham transactions disclosed in return to be re-assessed in income escaping assessment and not in block assessment

August 7, 2014[2014] 47 taxmann.com 80 (Allahabad)
IT: Authorities were justified in not including gift cheques in block assessment proceedings where during post search enquiry it became known that gift cheques shown by assessee in its return filed under section 139 were not regular transactions but were purely arranged transactions to avoid income-tax
IT: Material found in post search enquiries could form a 'reason to believe' that income had escaped assessment by issuance of a notice under section 143(2), however where period under section 143(2) had expired, Assessing Officer having genuine reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment, could issue notice under section 148
r


COMPANY CASES

Volume 185 Part 6 (Issue dated 8-8-2014)
SUBJECT INDEX TO CASES REPORTED IN THIS PART
SUPREME COURT
Offences and prosecution --Cheque--Dishonour of cheque--Offence by company--Liability of directors--Absence of specific allegations in complaint that directors were in charge of and responsible for conduct of business of company at relevant time--Proceedings against directors and summons quashed--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, ss. 138, 141-- Mannalal Chamaria v. State of West Bengal . . . 214

COMPANY LAW BOARD ORDERS
Oppression and mismanagement --Oppression--Breach of private agreement between shareholders not act of oppression--Illegal removal of nominee director in breach of shareholders’ agreement and refusal of respondents to appoint petitioner’s nominee in board of directors as provided under shareholders’ agreement--Petitioner’s nominees already on board of directors of company--Petitioner not recommending names in proper manner--Issue to be solved by parties--Directorial complaints not ordinarily to be taken as ground for oppression in “public limited companyâ€--Prejudice caused to interest of company not established by furnishing necessary particulars--Failure to convene annual general meeting--Not oppression or mismanagement--Second respondent appointed as managing director in terms of shareholders’ agreement--No financial irregularities proved justifying removal of second respondent--No case of oppression and mismanagement--Directions for appointment of petitioner’s nominee directors--Companies Act, 1956, ss. 397, 398-- Swal Corporation Ltd. v. Universal Pestochem Industries (India) Ltd. . . . 217
----Petition for relief--Allotment and transfer of shares with view to diluting petitioning shareholders’ shareholding--Oppressive and to be set aside--Removal of promoter-director under section 283(1)(g)--Due procedure not followed--Directorship restored--Appointment of additional director--Continuation of directors beyond date of convening of next annual general meeting illegal and to be set aside--Failure to justify creating of huge unsecured liabilities--Direction to appoint internal auditor--Companies Act, 1956, ss. 283(1)(g), 397, 398-- Ravinder Singh Mehta v. Trimurti Resorts P. Ltd. . . . 240
----Petition for relief--Procedure--Failure by respondents to file counter statement--Averments in petition not to be deemed admitted by respondents--Respondents’ arguments to be heard--Companies Act, 1956, ss. 397, 398--Indian Evidence Act, 1872, s. 58-- Swal Corporation Ltd. v. Universal Pestochem Industries (India) Ltd.
. . . 217




On Thursday, 7 August 2014 6:53 AM, Ca Next Step <donotreply@canextstep.com> wrote:



CA NEXT STEP
TAKE THE NEXT STEP TOWARDS SUCCESS
Home | AUDIT | INCOME TAX | CORPORATE LAW | VAT | EXCISE | SERVICE TAX | FINANCE | STUDENT | OTHER

Articles

Shared Files

Quick Register now on our website www.canextstep.com and get regular Newsletter in your e mail.
Please add donotreply@canextstep.net to your address book in order to receive this mail directly to your inbox. You received this mail because you subscribed to canextstep newsletter.
Facebook   twitter   RSS

About | Terms & Conditions | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | FAQ | Contact Us
© 2012 Ca Next Step. Powered By Elsner.com




__._,_.___
View attachments on the web

Posted by: Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com>


receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com





__,_._,___

No comments:

Post a Comment