IIM Jammu 5th among 21 IIMs to secure two international accreditations
They engaged in an extensive review involving leadership, faculty, students, alumni, and industry partners. Impressed by the institute's rapid growth, governance, and social impact, the team broke from precedent to award the full five-year accreditation -- typically reserved for much older institutions.EFMD ACCREDITATION CONFIRMS IIM JAMMU 'S GLOBAL VISIONIn March 2025, IIM Jammu hosted EFMD's Peer Review Team for programme-level accreditation of its MBA.Evaluated on globalisation, practical relevance, and ethical education, the institute earned praise for its curriculum design, leadership approach, and student engagement.The official three-year accreditation was confirmed during EFMD's board meeting in Austria on June 17, 2025.Leadership at IIM Jammu described the twin accreditations as both a recognition and a responsibility. 'This is a testament to our quality, vision, and global aspirations,' said Professor BS Sahay, Director of IIM Jammu.advertisementChairman Dr Milind P Kamble emphasised the institute's role in nation-building, aligning with the vision of a Viksit Bharat. The academic team highlighted how these recognitions will boost international collaboration and enhance India's global academic standing.IIM Jammu, with its achievements, has positioned itself not only as a fast-rising Indian B-school but also as a global institution shaping future-ready leaders through excellence, ethics, and innovation.- Ends
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
Boeing Defense Workers Reject Contract in New Labor Turmoil
(Bloomberg) -- Boeing Co. faces the risk of a strike at its St. Louis defense hub after union workers rejected a contract offer that would boost their wages by 20% over four years. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Local 837, which represents 3,200 Boeing defense workers in Missouri and Illinois, voted overwhelmingly against the new terms Sunday. The Boeing proposal 'fell short of addressing the priorities and sacrifices' of the company's skilled workforce, the union said in a statement. 'Our members are standing together to demand a contract that respects their work and ensures a secure future.' While the present contract expires at 11:59 p.m. Central Time on Sunday, management still has a chance to win over rank-and-file members by sweetening its offer during a seven-day 'cooling off' period. If that's unsuccessful, IAM Local 837 workers will walk off the job and shut down manufacturing in Boeing's military aircraft hub. The aerospace manufacturer is seeking to avoid another labor standoff after a strike by a Seattle-based Machinists union crippled manufacturing at its commercial jet factories for more than two months last year. Boeing could not be immediately reached for comment. Any labor strife would be costly for Boeing's defense division, which hasn't earned an annual profit since 2022 and is in the middle of a turnaround. A strike would shut down assembly lines for Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18 fighter jets, T-7A trainer, MQ-25 drone refueler and other weapons systems. The labor uncertainty will be a focus for analysts when Boeing reports quarterly earnings on Tuesday. It's also a bellwether as GE Aerospace launches contract negotiations with a separate IAM local on Sunday. St. Louis workers last went on strike in 1996 and don't have a history of activism, unlike Boeing's unions in the Pacific Northwest, according to Scott Mikus, an analyst with Melius Research. Union members initially rejected management's offer during the last negotiation with Boeing in 2022, before accepting a three-year deal with a 14% general wage increase and cost-of-living adjustments. While Puget Sound labor leaders endorsed Boeing's initial offer last year, they were rebuffed by rank-and-file members embittered by an earlier 10-year contract that stripped away pensions and locked in low wage increases while inflation soared. The lengthy strike squeezed the company's working capital and spurred Boeing to sell equity worth almost $24 billion. --With assistance from Bill Haubert. (Updates with comments from labor union in third paragraph, attempt to reach Boeing in fifth paragraph.) More stories like this are available on
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
9 minutes ago
- Business Standard
SCL fabricates 20 indigenous semiconductor chips designed by students
36 more chips designed by students in the pipeline Aashish Aryan New Delhi Listen to This Article The Semiconductor Lab (SCL) at Mohali has completed the fabrication of 20 semiconductor chips designed by students from across 17 Indian engineering institutes, including the Indian Institute of Technology at Jammu and Indore, sources said. These chips are now ready for tape-out and will soon be tested, the sources told Business Standard. In addition to these, 36 more chips designed in India by students are at various stages of fabrication at SCL, and are likely to be ready for tape-out in the next six months, they added. SCL Mohali had started offering end-to-end fabrication, testing and packaging support for chip
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
Substance vs form: All eyes now on Tiger Global case after SC's verdict on global hospitality leader Hyatt International
Mumbai: After the Supreme Court verdict last week on the global hospitality leader Hyatt International, all eyes are on the high-stake Tiger Global case , whose outcome, expected in August, could sway the fortunes of many foreign investors and force them to change the way they run their shops to bet on India. But, can the Hyatt ruling have a rub-off on the verdict on Tiger? With the same bench of judges that ruled on Hyatt to decide on Tiger-the question has cropped up among legal eagles, tax experts, and MNCs as the battle between Tiger, an offshore investor, and India's tax office nears a closure. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Villas For Sale in Dubai Might Surprise You Dubai villas | search ads Get Deals Undo The question stems from the court's observation that "legal form does not override economic substance". This single observation, according to several practitioners, may link the two cases, even though they pertain to different issues. THE COMMON LINK Live Events The Hyatt feud was over whether the foreign firm, acting as a consultant to an Indian hotel group, had a ' permanent establishment ' (PE) in India. The court-while observing that "legal form does not override economic substance" -said it did as Hyatt was not a typical consultant but was deeply involved in running the hotel in India, thanks to the terms of the deal. A 'PE' status means the foreign party would pay tax here on the portion of its global earnings attributable to India - and not just the tax deducted from its fees. The Tiger case, on the other hand, relates to 'capital gains' on sale of stocks - whether a Mauritius entity could escape tax in India merely on the back of the ' tax residency certificate ' (TRC) it obtained from the Mauritian authorities under the treaty the country has with India. Here is how the 'substance versus form' argument comes up: is TRC, a piece of paper, good enough to avoid tax by a shell entity which has no office, hires few or no employees, and has no power to make decisions? While the TRC gives it 'legal form', in reality, it may just be a paper outfit lacking 'substance'. "The Hon'ble SC regarded utmost importance to 'substance over form principle' and in doing so did a deep dive into the documents to ascertain 'control of operations', actual activities of employees and commercial agreements (like revenue linked service fees) in the Hyatt International matter. Substance over form , control and management and commercial substance are important factors that take centre stage even in treaty eligibility cases and a ruling in the case of Tiger Global is expected soon," said Ashish Mehta, partner at the law firm Khaitan & Co. A COURT REMINDS It's widely believed that armed with TRCs, many overseas private equity houses save tax on sale of shares (acquired before 2017) while foreign portfolio investors avoid tax on profits from equity derivatives as their investing arms are incorporated in treaty jurisdictions like Mauritius and Singapore. Many such arrangements would come unstuck, if the SC points at inadequate substance to rule against Tiger. "Recent rulings, from Formula One to Nestle SA to Hyatt International, demonstrate a consistent judicial approach: for any tax structure, the legal framework must align with the actual, factual substance of the arrangement. If not, the court may not grant tax relief in such cases," said Ashish Karundia, founder of the CA firm Ashish Karundia & Co. He feels that post Hyatt, chances are that non-residents may also be required to satisfy a 'substance' test in addition to holding a TRC when seeking treaty benefits. "Considering the greater scrutiny faced nowadays, it is essential to understand that the degree of reliability assigned to TRC is that of sufficient evidence rather than an irrebuttable evidence. It is sufficient, to begin with, but neither sacrosanct nor infallible!," said Karundia. The tax office had questioned Tiger Global's stand of not paying tax when it sold shares of Flipkart Singapore (holding shares of an Indian company) to another foreign investor (linked to Walmart) on the grounds that Tiger's Mauritius arm (the actual seller owning the Singapore entity) was only a vehicle used to avoid tax. Agreeing on the possibility of the court putting matters under the 'substance' lens, Rahul Garg, managing partner of Asire Consulting, which advises MNCs on tax, finance, assurance, and regulatory matters, said, "The court examined the commercial and operational realities to evaluate the degree of control and supervision by the foreign entity. It reiterated that legal form does not override economic substance. Since it's a fundamental requirement that tax treaties need to be availed in good faith, these observations could further support the Revenue's case if it can prove that the parent was an active participant with significant control and supervision in the decision making on investments by the entity which recorded the capital gains." It isn't the first time the court held substance over form. But that it chose to give a subtle reminder in the Hyatt ruling is lending itself to interpretation.
