Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Invocation of jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C - cognizance of offences on basis of supplementary complaint filed by the respondent against the petitioner second time - Regarding the filing of the supplementary complaint, the High Court determined that it was permissible under the law, especially when further investigation uncovers new evidence or implicates additional offenders. - However, concerning the Special Judge's actions in taking cognizance and issuing process based on the supplementary complaint, the High Court found them legally unsustainable. It clarified that cognizance can only be taken once for the same offense and that the court cannot take cognizance again based on a supplementary complaint when proceedings are already underway based on the initial complaint.
Invocation of jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C - cognizance of offences on basis of supplementary complaint filed by the respondent against the petitioner second time - Regarding the filing of the supplementary complaint, the High Court determined that it was permissible under the law, especially when further investigation uncovers new evidence or implicates additional offenders. - However, concerning the Special Judge's actions in taking cognizance and issuing process based on the supplementary complaint, the High Court found them legally unsustainable. It clarified that cognizance can only be taken once for the same offense and that the court cannot take cognizance again based on a supplementary complaint when proceedings are already underway based on the initial complaint.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
