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 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 
