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...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
501 to 520 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Dishonour of cheque - vicarious liability in criminal law - The SC interpreted Section 7 of the NI Act to identify the "drawer" as the individual issuing the cheque, establishing the drawer's primary obligation u/s 138 to maintain sufficient funds. The argument that directors or authorized signatories should be liable u/s 143A misinterprets statutory language and intent. The general rule against vicarious criminal liability underscores that individuals are not typically liable for others' acts unless specific provisions extend such liability. Section 141 extends liability to company officers for cheque dishonour, but liability arises from individual conduct, not merely position. The SC upheld the strict interpretation of "drawer" as the cheque issuer, excluding authorized signatories, aligning with legislative intent, precedents, and interpretation principles. The primary liability lies with the company, while management is vicariously liable u/s 141's conditions.
Dishonour of cheque - vicarious liability in criminal law - The SC interpreted Section 7 of the NI Act to identify the "drawer" as the individual issuing the cheque, establishing the drawer's primary obligation u/s 138 to maintain sufficient funds. The argument that directors or authorized signatories should be liable u/s 143A misinterprets statutory language and intent. The general rule against vicarious criminal liability underscores that individuals are not typically liable for others' acts unless specific provisions extend such liability. Section 141 extends liability to company officers for cheque dishonour, but liability arises from individual conduct, not merely position. The SC upheld the strict interpretation of "drawer" as the cheque issuer, excluding authorized signatories, aligning with legislative intent, precedents, and interpretation principles. The primary liability lies with the company, while management is vicariously liable u/s 141's conditions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
