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...
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking to quash a complaint u/s 482 CrPC regarding dishonour of a cheque. The petitioner, a Chief Financial Officer, was held liable u/s 138 and 141 of the NI Act as a 'Key Managerial Personnel' of the company and signatory to the cheque. The complaint did not rely on u/s 28 of the NI Act but on u/s 141 to implicate the petitioner. The court distinguished the case from Sivagurunatha Pillai, stating it did not apply. The petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner to present defenses at the Trial Court.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking to quash a complaint u/s 482 CrPC regarding dishonour of a cheque. The petitioner, a Chief Financial Officer, was held liable u/s 138 and 141 of the NI Act as a 'Key Managerial Personnel' of the company and signatory to the cheque. The complaint did not rely on u/s 28 of the NI Act but on u/s 141 to implicate the petitioner. The court distinguished the case from Sivagurunatha Pillai, stating it did not apply. The petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner to present defenses at the Trial Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.