Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court analyzed evidence in a case involving dishonored cheques. The court emphasized the need to rebut the presumption u/s 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner failed to prove the origin of the loan amount and the purpose of issuing the cheques. The respondent successfully demonstrated that the cheques were not for a legally enforceable debt. As a result, the petitioner's appeal was deemed futile, and the court upheld the lower court's decision, dismissing the petition. The High Court clarified its authority to reevaluate evidence but stressed the need for a justifiable basis for interference with trial court decisions.
The High Court analyzed evidence in a case involving dishonored cheques. The court emphasized the need to rebut the presumption u/s 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner failed to prove the origin of the loan amount and the purpose of issuing the cheques. The respondent successfully demonstrated that the cheques were not for a legally enforceable debt. As a result, the petitioner's appeal was deemed futile, and the court upheld the lower court's decision, dismissing the petition. The High Court clarified its authority to reevaluate evidence but stressed the need for a justifiable basis for interference with trial court decisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
