Search Results for "subsidiary facts"

805 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 805 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Directs Police to Conduct Fair Investigation in Crime No.193/2022 in Accordance with Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 and RBI/NPCI Guidelines — Petitioner PhonePe Private Limited seeks mandamus for comprehensive probe.

The petitioner, PhonePe Private Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013 and a Third Party Application Provider (TPAP) in the UPI e...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding-Up Petition as Foreign Company Failed to Comply with Registration Requirements Under Sections 592 and 599 of Companies Act, 1956. Petitioner, a foreign company with a place of business in India, cannot maintain a winding-up petition without registering under the Act.

The petitioner, Willis Europe B.V., a company incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands with its principal place of business in the United Kingdo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging FEMA Show Cause Notices Against BCCI President. Section 42 of FEMA applies to persons in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business of a company, and the petitioner as President is covered.

The petitioner, Shashank Vyankatesh Manohar, was the President of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) from 2008 to 2011. During this peri...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Depreciation on Original Cost in Amalgamation Case Under Rule 10 of Income Tax Rules. Notional Depreciation to Non-Resident Parent Does Not Reduce Written Down Value for Successor Company.

The case involves an Income Tax Reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arising from the assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78, and 19...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Injunction in Trademark Infringement Suit by 'VOGUE' Magazine Owner Against 'JUST IN VOGUE' Retail Services. Well-Known Mark 'VOGUE' Protected Against Use for Dissimilar Services Under Section 29(4) of Trade Marks Act, 1999.

The Plaintiffs, Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. and its subsidiary, are the proprietors and users of the trademark 'VOGUE' in respect of magazines a...