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 SC affirmed that under Section 138 NI Act the Proviso(b) requires a clear, specific demand of the identical cheque amount, and a discrepancy between the cheque sum and the amount demanded in the statutory notice renders the notice legally invalid. The Court rejected the contention that the erroneous amount could be excused as a mere typographical slip, holding that such ambiguity defeats the statutory requirement and vitiates the notice. Consequently the High Court's order quashing the notice was upheld and the appeals dismissed, with no interference warranted given failure to comply with the proviso's conditions necessary to sustain a prosecution under Section 138.
The SC affirmed that under Section 138 NI Act the Proviso(b) requires a clear, specific demand of the identical cheque amount, and a discrepancy between the cheque sum and the amount demanded in the statutory notice renders the notice legally invalid. The Court rejected the contention that the erroneous amount could be excused as a mere typographical slip, holding that such ambiguity defeats the statutory requirement and vitiates the notice. Consequently the High Court's order quashing the notice was upheld and the appeals dismissed, with no interference warranted given failure to comply with the proviso's conditions necessary to sustain a prosecution under Section 138.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
