Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 95794 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.