Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
This is a legal case involving allegations of unauthorized transfer of funds from a Non-Resident External (NRE) account by a bank. The key points are: The suit was filed within the limitation period and the court fee deficiency was cured. There was no evidence that the plaintiff No. 2 had changed her residential status from NRI to resident Indian and informed the bank. The plaintiffs failed to prove that the instructions on the cheque were not given by plaintiff No. 2 but written by the bank. The plaintiffs did not discharge the burden of proof regarding the improper encashment of the cheque. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) provisions were not applicable as no complaint was filed with the Enforcement Directorate and the plaintiffs failed to show how FERA applied against the bank. Consequently, the plaintiffs were not entitled to recovery of any amount from the bank.
This is a legal case involving allegations of unauthorized transfer of funds from a Non-Resident External (NRE) account by a bank. The key points are: The suit was filed within the limitation period and the court fee deficiency was cured. There was no evidence that the plaintiff No. 2 had changed her residential status from NRI to resident Indian and informed the bank. The plaintiffs failed to prove that the instructions on the cheque were not given by plaintiff No. 2 but written by the bank. The plaintiffs did not discharge the burden of proof regarding the improper encashment of the cheque. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) provisions were not applicable as no complaint was filed with the Enforcement Directorate and the plaintiffs failed to show how FERA applied against the bank. Consequently, the plaintiffs were not entitled to recovery of any amount from the bank.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
