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" ?
The SC held that in dishonour of cheque cases under Section 138 read with Section 141, a partnership firm lacks separate legal personality and cannot be prosecuted independently of its partners. The partners are jointly and severally liable, not vicariously, for the offence, distinguishing them from a company which enjoys separate legal identity and vicarious liability of its directors. Consequently, the dismissal of the complaint for non-joinder of the partnership firm as an accused was erroneous. The notice issued to the partners is deemed to include the firm, and the complaint remains maintainable against the partners notwithstanding the firm's absence as a party. The SC set aside the High Court's order and allowed the appeal, permitting the partnership firm to be arraigned as an accused alongside its partners.
The SC held that in dishonour of cheque cases under Section 138 read with Section 141, a partnership firm lacks separate legal personality and cannot be prosecuted independently of its partners. The partners are jointly and severally liable, not vicariously, for the offence, distinguishing them from a company which enjoys separate legal identity and vicarious liability of its directors. Consequently, the dismissal of the complaint for non-joinder of the partnership firm as an accused was erroneous. The notice issued to the partners is deemed to include the firm, and the complaint remains maintainable against the partners notwithstanding the firm's absence as a party. The SC set aside the High Court's order and allowed the appeal, permitting the partnership firm to be arraigned as an accused alongside its partners.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
