1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>High Court of Madras settles dispute on email notice demand, urges negotiation, and dismisses writ petition.</h1> The High Court of Madras disposed of a case involving a petition to quash an electronic mail notice of demand. The court encouraged the parties to ... Validity of demand notice - HELD THAT:- The e-mails issued by the respondent calling for payment of interest, one of which the petitioner has replied to. It would be appropriate for this conversation to continue and the respondents to hear the party to arrive at a proper reconciliation of the amount to be paid, if any - In fact, in the counter filed in February 20201, the respondent has quantified the interest demand from 10.11.2010 to 22.02.2018 at a figure of βΉ 24,40,546/- and the petitioner may file its reply to the respondent in regard to the quantification made. Petition disposed off. The High Court of Madras heard a case regarding a petition to quash a notice of demand sent via electronic mail. The court advised the parties to continue their conversation to reconcile the amount to be paid as interest. The respondent quantified the interest demand from a specific period, and the petitioner was asked to reply to this quantification. The court decided not to intervene and disposed of the writ petition without any costs.