Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95636 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Admission of cheque execution triggers presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable debt under the cheque-dishonour framework. A cash loan exceeding the limit under section 269SS of the Income-tax Act may attract penalty under section 271D, but does not render the underlying transaction illegal, void or unenforceable; it does not itself rebut those presumptions. The presumption in favour of the cheque holder remains rebuttable, but a bare denial is insufficient. The accused must explain the cheque's issuance and possession, while credible evidence that the payee lacked financial capacity to lend may rebut the presumption. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration of the evidence.
Admission of cheque execution triggers presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable debt under the cheque-dishonour framework. A cash loan exceeding the limit under section 269SS of the Income-tax Act may attract penalty under section 271D, but does not render the underlying transaction illegal, void or unenforceable; it does not itself rebut those presumptions. The presumption in favour of the cheque holder remains rebuttable, but a bare denial is insufficient. The accused must explain the cheque's issuance and possession, while credible evidence that the payee lacked financial capacity to lend may rebut the presumption. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration of the evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.