Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Acquittal of the accused in a cheque dishonor case. The court observed that once the accused raises a probable defense by leading evidence to show no debt/liability existed, the presumptions u/ss 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act disappear. The burden then shifts to the complainant to prove the existence of debt as a matter of fact. In this case, the accused denied issuing the cheque and his signatures. Expert opinion was obtained, and the trial court found the complainant failed to prove the debt/liability's existence, mode of loan advancement, or documentary evidence. The high court found no perversity in the acquittal order, dismissing the petition challenging the acquittal.
Acquittal of the accused in a cheque dishonor case. The court observed that once the accused raises a probable defense by leading evidence to show no debt/liability existed, the presumptions u/ss 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act disappear. The burden then shifts to the complainant to prove the existence of debt as a matter of fact. In this case, the accused denied issuing the cheque and his signatures. Expert opinion was obtained, and the trial court found the complainant failed to prove the debt/liability's existence, mode of loan advancement, or documentary evidence. The high court found no perversity in the acquittal order, dismissing the petition challenging the acquittal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
