Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95714 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Dishonour of Cheque - vicarious liability of directors - After considering the submissions of both parties, the court found that the impugned orders suffered from non-application of mind and lacked sufficient averments to justify the prosecution of the petitioners. It emphasized that liability under Section 141 is not based solely on designation but on the actual role played in the company's affairs. As the complaints failed to provide specific allegations against the petitioners regarding their involvement or negligence, the court held that prosecuting them would amount to an abuse of process.
Dishonour of Cheque - vicarious liability of directors - After considering the submissions of both parties, the court found that the impugned orders suffered from non-application of mind and lacked sufficient averments to justify the prosecution of the petitioners. It emphasized that liability under Section 141 is not based solely on designation but on the actual role played in the company's affairs. As the complaints failed to provide specific allegations against the petitioners regarding their involvement or negligence, the court held that prosecuting them would amount to an abuse of process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.