Coercive recovery during GST searches is restrained pending scrutiny, preserving normal business operations and requiring adherence to investigation g...
COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Page of 4894
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
721 to 740 of 97867 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The petitioner contended that the dishonored cheques were not issued against any legally enforceable debt, claiming they were given as blank security cheques to one Vinod Tiwari for a loan. However, the petitioner failed to substantiate this claim through evidence or cross-examination of the respondent. Merely reiterating contentions without adducing material to show the loan existed with Vinod Tiwari was insufficient to dislodge the presumptions raised u/ss 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court found no infirmity in the impugned order, as the petitioner failed to rebut the presumptions, and dismissed the petition, exercising restraint from reappreciating evidence unless the order was wholly unreasonable or untenable.
The petitioner contended that the dishonored cheques were not issued against any legally enforceable debt, claiming they were given as blank security cheques to one Vinod Tiwari for a loan. However, the petitioner failed to substantiate this claim through evidence or cross-examination of the respondent. Merely reiterating contentions without adducing material to show the loan existed with Vinod Tiwari was insufficient to dislodge the presumptions raised u/ss 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court found no infirmity in the impugned order, as the petitioner failed to rebut the presumptions, and dismissed the petition, exercising restraint from reappreciating evidence unless the order was wholly unreasonable or untenable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4894 
