Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
The High Court considered a case involving dishonour of cheque due to insufficiency of funds, determining if a legally enforceable debt existed. The accused was acquitted of the offence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court assessed evidence to prove cheque execution, rebutting statutory presumptions u/s 139 and 118 of the NI Act. Referring to legal precedents, it highlighted the onus on the accused akin to civil proceedings and the standard of proof required to rebut presumptions. Emphasizing the principle that if two views are possible, an appellate court should not reverse an acquittal. The court upheld the finding that the accused successfully rebutted statutory presumptions, leading to dismissal of the appeal.
The High Court considered a case involving dishonour of cheque due to insufficiency of funds, determining if a legally enforceable debt existed. The accused was acquitted of the offence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court assessed evidence to prove cheque execution, rebutting statutory presumptions u/s 139 and 118 of the NI Act. Referring to legal precedents, it highlighted the onus on the accused akin to civil proceedings and the standard of proof required to rebut presumptions. Emphasizing the principle that if two views are possible, an appellate court should not reverse an acquittal. The court upheld the finding that the accused successfully rebutted statutory presumptions, leading to dismissal of the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
