Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In a dishonored cheque case, the SC overturned the High Court's decision, ruling that the complainant is not obligated at the threshold to prove financial capacity to make payments for which the cheque was issued. The Court clarified that Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act place the burden on the accused to rebut the statutory presumption, not on the complainant to establish detailed evidence of transactions. The SC found the complainant had successfully established a case under Section 138, and the High Court erred in overturning concurrent findings of guilt by the Trial Court and Appellate Court. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
In a dishonored cheque case, the SC overturned the High Court's decision, ruling that the complainant is not obligated at the threshold to prove financial capacity to make payments for which the cheque was issued. The Court clarified that Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act place the burden on the accused to rebut the statutory presumption, not on the complainant to establish detailed evidence of transactions. The SC found the complainant had successfully established a case under Section 138, and the High Court erred in overturning concurrent findings of guilt by the Trial Court and Appellate Court. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
