Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Legal presumption u/s. 132(4A) &s.292C - whether cannot be given restrictive interpretation so as to consider applicable only to the searched person and not to other person? - Even if it is considered for any reason that the provisions of Sec.132(4A) & s.292C of the Act are applicable to the assessee, the same has no bearing on the issue under consideration, because, in the said document there is no reference to the name of the assessee or the concerned property at Bangalore in the relevant entry in the seized cash book. - The rebuttal presumption cannot extend to the receipt of such cash by the assessee in absence of any reference to the name of the assessee or the concerned property at Bangalore in the relevant document. - AT
Legal presumption u/s. 132(4A) &s.292C - whether cannot be given restrictive interpretation so as to consider applicable only to the searched person and not to other person? - Even if it is considered for any reason that the provisions of Sec.132(4A) & s.292C of the Act are applicable to the assessee, the same has no bearing on the issue under consideration, because, in the said document there is no reference to the name of the assessee or the concerned property at Bangalore in the relevant entry in the seized cash book. - The rebuttal presumption cannot extend to the receipt of such cash by the assessee in absence of any reference to the name of the assessee or the concerned property at Bangalore in the relevant document. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.