Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does not impose automatic vicarious liability on a director merely because of directorship. A cheque-dishonour complaint must specifically allege that the person was in charge of and responsible for the company's business when the offence occurred, or that it resulted from that person's consent, connivance or neglect. General allegations are inadequate, particularly where the person neither signed the cheques nor remained a director when they were issued and dishonoured. Statutory records establishing resignation before issuance of the cheques negate such liability, and continuation of proceedings in those circumstances constitutes abuse of process.
Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does not impose automatic vicarious liability on a director merely because of directorship. A cheque-dishonour complaint must specifically allege that the person was in charge of and responsible for the company's business when the offence occurred, or that it resulted from that person's consent, connivance or neglect. General allegations are inadequate, particularly where the person neither signed the cheques nor remained a director when they were issued and dishonoured. Statutory records establishing resignation before issuance of the cheques negate such liability, and continuation of proceedings in those circumstances constitutes abuse of process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.