Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Home
2014 (4) TMI 1212 - AT - Companies LawCreation of artificial volumes - Allegations against the appellant were mainly that he made misleading corporate announcement in March 2005 regarding preferential / rights issue with a view to lure investors - Guilty of violating PFUTP Regulations SAST Regulations and PIT Regulations - Held that - As during the proceedings before this Tribunal the appellant was granted leave to obtain and submit a signature comparison report from a Forensic expert. Accordingly the appellant furnished a signature comparison report dated June 18 2013. The respondent also filed reply / comments in response to the said report. During the course of hearing it was felt that in the facts and circumstances of the case a comparison of the appellant s signature would be required to ascertain authenticity of his alleged signature on the transfer deed. This factual analysis may also require additional evidence. It would be therefore appropriate to remand this matter to the learned adjudicating officer for fresh hearing and adjudication.
|