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 ...
The case involves a dispute regarding the dishonour of cheques u/s 138 of the N.I. Act. The petitioner claimed to have sold 5 acres of land for Rs. 7.75 Crores, with contradictions on the execution of the Sale Deed. The respondent denied the Sale Deed's authenticity, requiring proof. The High Court held that the complaint prima facie discloses an offence, citing the burden of proving the absence of debt or liability. The petitioner's admission to issuing cheques and lack of challenge to summoning orders led to dismissal of the petition, as no prima facie case was found.
The case involves a dispute regarding the dishonour of cheques u/s 138 of the N.I. Act. The petitioner claimed to have sold 5 acres of land for Rs. 7.75 Crores, with contradictions on the execution of the Sale Deed. The respondent denied the Sale Deed's authenticity, requiring proof. The High Court held that the complaint prima facie discloses an offence, citing the burden of proving the absence of debt or liability. The petitioner's admission to issuing cheques and lack of challenge to summoning orders led to dismissal of the petition, as no prima facie case was found.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.