Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The SC held that the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act was invalid due to suppression of material facts by the respondent, a Co-operative Credit Society. The respondent had concealed the appellant's reply dated 28th November 2016 and letter dated 13th December 2016, which requested documents related to an alleged overdraft facility of Rs.11,97,000/-. The respondent falsely claimed the appellant never responded to the demand notice regarding a dishonored cheque for Rs.27,27,460/-. The Court determined that initiating criminal proceedings while suppressing material facts constitutes abuse of process. The JMFC could properly consider this rebuttal to the Section 139 presumption at the process issuance stage. The SC set aside the HC's order and allowed the appeal.
The SC held that the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act was invalid due to suppression of material facts by the respondent, a Co-operative Credit Society. The respondent had concealed the appellant's reply dated 28th November 2016 and letter dated 13th December 2016, which requested documents related to an alleged overdraft facility of Rs.11,97,000/-. The respondent falsely claimed the appellant never responded to the demand notice regarding a dishonored cheque for Rs.27,27,460/-. The Court determined that initiating criminal proceedings while suppressing material facts constitutes abuse of process. The JMFC could properly consider this rebuttal to the Section 139 presumption at the process issuance stage. The SC set aside the HC's order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
