Wednesday, August 5, 2015

TRANSACTIONS - commercial v Related Part (ies) ?

Related - WHO IS and WHO IS NOT:

By Blood (birth) / creation per law>>>????

Holding X Subsidiary
Promoter X Shareholder, Creditor, so on 

why THIRD  not to be taken as 'related'- who has a stake- RIGHT  /INTEREST vested , hence most certainly likely to be impacted /impaired ?
is it not an obsession  to lay undue / unjustified emphasis ?

An impertinent exercise, a rule of thumb, ..

As a rule ,Why not as an exception ? - uniform and universal ?

Today's Real Life-  EVEN RELATION BY BLOOD AT LOGGERHEADS ; IS IT NOT ?!


WRONG ASSUMPTION,/ PRESUMPTION , FATALLY SO - EVERY HUMAN BEING IS A CRIMINAL, WRONG-DOER, CULPRIT- UNLESS PROVED OTHERISE - TO WHOSE SATISFACTION - OF ANOTHERF OR MORE FELLOW hbs ?!

No comments:

Post a Comment