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 HC quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against a Company Secretary in a dishonoured cheque case. The Court held that the trial court mechanically issued summons without conducting mandatory inquiry under Section 202 CrPC, violating procedural requirements. The petitioner, being merely a non-executive Company Secretary, was neither a director, shareholder, nor signatory to the dishonoured cheque, and had no role in day-to-day business affairs or financial transactions. The complainant failed to establish the Company Secretary's responsibility for the company's conduct. The Court exercised inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process, finding insufficient grounds to proceed against a person with limited liability who was not in charge of business operations.
The HC quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against a Company Secretary in a dishonoured cheque case. The Court held that the trial court mechanically issued summons without conducting mandatory inquiry under Section 202 CrPC, violating procedural requirements. The petitioner, being merely a non-executive Company Secretary, was neither a director, shareholder, nor signatory to the dishonoured cheque, and had no role in day-to-day business affairs or financial transactions. The complainant failed to establish the Company Secretary's responsibility for the company's conduct. The Court exercised inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process, finding insufficient grounds to proceed against a person with limited liability who was not in charge of business operations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
