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 dismissed the writ petition and upheld the revisional court's order, holding that the magistrate lawfully proceeded under the procedural mandate for complaint verification and issuance of process. The court found no perversity or jurisdictional error in retaining criminal proceedings for dishonour of cheque where a signed cheque can constitute a new, legally enforceable promise notwithstanding an earlier time-barred transaction under the Limitation Act, by operation of Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act; past consideration may validate such promise. Questions as to whether the underlying debt is time-barred are factual mixed issues for trial; interference under Section 482 CrPC was not warranted, and the petition was dismissed.
The HC dismissed the writ petition and upheld the revisional court's order, holding that the magistrate lawfully proceeded under the procedural mandate for complaint verification and issuance of process. The court found no perversity or jurisdictional error in retaining criminal proceedings for dishonour of cheque where a signed cheque can constitute a new, legally enforceable promise notwithstanding an earlier time-barred transaction under the Limitation Act, by operation of Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act; past consideration may validate such promise. Questions as to whether the underlying debt is time-barred are factual mixed issues for trial; interference under Section 482 CrPC was not warranted, and the petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
