Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
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...
Pertaining to a challenge against conviction and sentence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court observed that the petitioner's defense of repaying the loan amount in cash without acknowledgment was rightly rejected by the lower courts. The petitioner failed to provide cogent evidence to discharge the presumption against him u/s 139 of the NI Act read with Section 118 of the Evidence Act. The objection regarding the loan being taken in cash, violating the Income Tax Act, does not absolve the petitioner's liability u/s 138. The revision petition lacked merit for interference with the conviction and sentence, leading to its dismissal.
Pertaining to a challenge against conviction and sentence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court observed that the petitioner's defense of repaying the loan amount in cash without acknowledgment was rightly rejected by the lower courts. The petitioner failed to provide cogent evidence to discharge the presumption against him u/s 139 of the NI Act read with Section 118 of the Evidence Act. The objection regarding the loan being taken in cash, violating the Income Tax Act, does not absolve the petitioner's liability u/s 138. The revision petition lacked merit for interference with the conviction and sentence, leading to its dismissal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.