Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
