Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
The HC allowed the revision application in a dishonour of cheque case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant, a company director, filed the complaint in his individual capacity without proper authorization or power of attorney from the company. The agreement was executed between two companies, requiring the complainant to represent the company rather than act personally. While lack of authorization constitutes a curable defect per Supreme Court precedent in M.M.T.C. Ltd. v. Medchl Chemicals, the company failed to rectify this defect at any subsequent stage. The Court held that authorized persons must file complaints on behalf of and in the name of the principal, not in their personal capacity, making the complaint legally impermissible.
The HC allowed the revision application in a dishonour of cheque case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant, a company director, filed the complaint in his individual capacity without proper authorization or power of attorney from the company. The agreement was executed between two companies, requiring the complainant to represent the company rather than act personally. While lack of authorization constitutes a curable defect per Supreme Court precedent in M.M.T.C. Ltd. v. Medchl Chemicals, the company failed to rectify this defect at any subsequent stage. The Court held that authorized persons must file complaints on behalf of and in the name of the principal, not in their personal capacity, making the complaint legally impermissible.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
