Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
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 4828 
Join Channel 
