Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 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" ?
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.