Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
For dishonour of a cheque drawn on a company account, the company must be arraigned as an accused before vicarious liability can attach to an authorised signatory or other persons responsible for its business. Omission of the company is a foundational defect that prevents valid cognizance under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 319 CrPC cannot be used to cure that defect by subsequently impleading the company after the statutory limitation period; any fresh complaint remains subject to limitation and delayed cognizance requires sufficient cause. The Supreme Court quashed the complaint and consequential proceedings, and held that the direction to suo motu arraign the company exceeded jurisdiction.
For dishonour of a cheque drawn on a company account, the company must be arraigned as an accused before vicarious liability can attach to an authorised signatory or other persons responsible for its business. Omission of the company is a foundational defect that prevents valid cognizance under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 319 CrPC cannot be used to cure that defect by subsequently impleading the company after the statutory limitation period; any fresh complaint remains subject to limitation and delayed cognizance requires sufficient cause. The Supreme Court quashed the complaint and consequential proceedings, and held that the direction to suo motu arraign the company exceeded jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
