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" ?
Dishonor of Cheque - Plaint was filed that Cheque was issued as security and misused by the defendant - Jurisdiction of Revisional Court in rejecting the plaint - In the instant case, on a reading paragraph 13 of the plaint, it is evident that cheque issued had been dishonoured and defendant no.1 had issued notice under Section 138 of N.I. Act on 10th June, 2009, to the plaintiff and its Managing Director replied to the same through their advocate on 23rd June, 2009. Therefore, it is evident that the plaintiff by seeking the aforesaid reliefs is in substance frustrating the right of defendant no.1 to take steps under the provisions of N.I. Act for releasing the amount of cheque issued by the plaintiff to defendant no.1 by filing a civil suit and/or by initiating a criminal prosecution - Plaint was rightly rejected - HC has erroneously set aside the order of the revisional court without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case- SC
Dishonor of Cheque - Plaint was filed that Cheque was issued as security and misused by the defendant - Jurisdiction of Revisional Court in rejecting the plaint - In the instant case, on a reading paragraph 13 of the plaint, it is evident that cheque issued had been dishonoured and defendant no.1 had issued notice under Section 138 of N.I. Act on 10th June, 2009, to the plaintiff and its Managing Director replied to the same through their advocate on 23rd June, 2009. Therefore, it is evident that the plaintiff by seeking the aforesaid reliefs is in substance frustrating the right of defendant no.1 to take steps under the provisions of N.I. Act for releasing the amount of cheque issued by the plaintiff to defendant no.1 by filing a civil suit and/or by initiating a criminal prosecution - Plaint was rightly rejected - HC has erroneously set aside the order of the revisional court without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case- SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
