Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Dishonor of Cheque - insufficient funds - vicarious liability of the petitioner u/s 141 of NI Act after tendering such resignation - the complainant should specifically state as to how and in what manner the accused was responsible - petitioner tendered resignation on 13th March, 2020, and the company in its meeting of Board of directors took the decision on 22nd November, 2021 yet such aspect is inconsequential - A bald cursory statement in a complaint that the Director (arrayed as an accused) is in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company without anything more as to the role of the Director is not sufficient to make him liable. - HC
Dishonor of Cheque - insufficient funds - vicarious liability of the petitioner u/s 141 of NI Act after tendering such resignation - the complainant should specifically state as to how and in what manner the accused was responsible - petitioner tendered resignation on 13th March, 2020, and the company in its meeting of Board of directors took the decision on 22nd November, 2021 yet such aspect is inconsequential - A bald cursory statement in a complaint that the Director (arrayed as an accused) is in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company without anything more as to the role of the Director is not sufficient to make him liable. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.