Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 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.