Dear sir
jab koi treader short sell karata hai auction maie jane ke bad buying price konsi hogi kya internal buying broking company kar sakti hai if no please tell me
CAN THE LEGAL HEIRS OF AUTHORS ALSO CLAIM MORAL RIGHTS U/S 57 OF COPYRIGHT ACT,1957 ?
I booked a flat with a private builder before marriage and after marriage, i got the name of my wife added to it. So the builder buyer agreement is signed by both of us, so as the loan documents with the bank. The flat was still in construction so no title created for anyone. After few months, relationship got strained and she filed false criminal cases and is living seperately. Now the flat is completed and the builder is offering possession of the flat but my wife is not staying with me. She wants to grab the flat. The builder is insisting to come together to take possession of flat otherwise builder will charge retention charges. Now all the payments till date are made by me alone through cheques and I am only paying the EMIs to the bank. Now i am in a situation where builder has taken 100% amount from me, not giving me possession and asking more money as retention charges. I am still paying the EMIs but not getting possession of the flat. What is the solution to come out of this situation? Please suggest.
A Japanees citizen arives in India on 13/04/08 for employment in a company registered in Japan and
1.gets salary in Japan in the Japanees currency(Yen) although he works in India.
2. NO TDS is deducted after he came in India.
3. In India he gets his allowances in US$.
ISSUES:1.His status in India, 2.His total taxable income in India,3.Tax relief under DTAA,4.If income is taxable in india conversation rate of Japanees'Yen,5. Whether deduction under Sec. 80C to 80U will be available 6.whethet deduction available in Japan will also be available in India.
what is period of limitation for filing a criminal complaint by a minor wife of 11years against his husband for Rape under section 376 IPC?
i want new company act and income tax act which is going to interduce in parliament in winter seasion
Dear All,
As per Press Note 7 of 2008 issued by the DIPP (available on the DIPP website) the minimum capitalisation of foreign holding requirements are as follows:
1. US$ 0.5 million in case the shareholding percentage is below 51%
2. US$ 5 million in case the shareholding percentage is between 51% & 75% &
3. US$ 20 million in case the shareholding percentage is between 75% & 100%
I want to know whether such minimum capitalisation requirement will also include the premium at which the shares are issued? Or whether 0.5, 5 & 20 millions should make up the total nominal amount of the face value of shares only.
Also any Act, Rule, circular or notification or any other document where the definition of minimum capitalisation is given..
Would really appreciate an answer at the earliest.
Thanks in advance, Regards,
Chandan
I own a credit card and I paid the amout by cheque The credit card provider has not presented my cheque for nearly a month and is charging me penal interest. They are also not sending me my statement of account.
Can I claim damages for practicing unfair business practices and also deficiency in service If I can how much. My cheque amount is Rs.10,00
Sir, Shall be greatful if you could givet your expert opinion on the following facts and questions.
An adhoc promotion was given pending criminal case. CS has been filed and framing of charges has not taken place for the past 8 years.Sanction order issued but it is defective as there is no pecuniery loss to the company on the date of sanction.All the money had been received before the date of sanction. However the sanction do mentions there is loss which was later clarified to Prosecution that all the mpney was received adn to take a view to continue the case or not.
Q1. An adhoc promotion was given. now next DPC is due and applicant is eligible otherwise for appearing for the DPC. During ad-hoc promotion can we call the applicant to face DPC for the next promotion. Pl. give reasoning in either case.
Q2. When the Review DPC is warrented.The earlier DPC was informed about the Criminal FIR, arrest and release of the applicant and also pending CS. Though the then DPC would not have taken these information, still they would have been biased in thier decision.The above ad-hoc was given based on the finding of the subsequent DPC. Can the Review DPC is warrented to make the record stright.
Pl. give SC or any HC decision to support with citation.
Regards
Prabhu40
asking the property documents from petitioner