Legal Reference Library

In Apollo Tyres Ltd vs. ACIT, the ITAT decided that the loss on sale of shares of a wholly-owned subsidiary is allowable as a business loss if the investment in the subsidiary was made for commercial purposes. Article referred: http://itatonline.org/archives/apollo-tyres-ltd-vs-acit-itat-cochin-s-371-the-loss-on-sale-of-shares-of-a-wholly-owned-subsidiary-is-allowable-as-a-business-loss-if-the-investment-in-the-subsidiary-was-made-for-commercial-purpo/

A subtle but fundamental distinction between “Loss of Estate” and “Loss to the Estate” was discussed in Omana P.K. and others v. Francis Edwin and others (2011 (4) KLT 952). This Judgment was challenged before the Apex Court, which has now dismissed the Appeal. The question raised in this case, was whether a certain sum which the dependants received as compensation for untimely death of Judgment debtor in a motor accident is attachable in Execution Proceedings. In this case, Justice Thomas P. Joseph speaking for the Kerala High Court had held the following (relying on The Chairman, A.P.S.R.T.C, Hyderabad vs. Smt. Shafiya Khatoon and Others) Capitalized value of the income spent on the dependents, subject to relevant deductions, is the pecuniary loss sustained by the members of his family through his death. The capitalized value of his income, subject to relevant deductions, would be the loss caused to the estate by his death. In other words, what amount the dependents would have got le...

Actual Loss to the investors is not pre-requisite for penalty on non-disclosure under Takeover Regulations The security market regulator imposed penalty of Rs. 4,50,000 on M/s. Khatau Exim Limited (the company) for non compliance with Takeover Regulation, 1997 and Sec. 15A(b) of the SEBI Act, 1992. The company was found guilty for not to make annual filing to the stock Exchanges where the company’s shares were listed in respect of the holdings of the promoters or person(s) having control over the company. The adjudicating officer of SEBI while considering the quantum of penalty relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court in SEBI v.  Shri Ram Mutual Fund in which it was ruled that, “penalty is attracted as soon as the contravention of the statutory obligation as contemplated by the Act and the Regulations is established and hence the intention of the parties committing such violation becomes wholly irrelevant…”. Adjudication Order in the matter of M/s. Khatau Exim Limited, ORD...