Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the trial court's order directing refund of the Rs.1,00,000 deposited under s.143A of the N.I. Act to the accused/appellant. The appellate court had set aside the conviction and compensation order, leaving no subsisting order against the accused; consequently the deposited amount cannot be retained or adjusted as interim compensation in a fresh complaint filed under s.142(1)(b) of the N.I. Act absent any interlocutory order granting such relief. The HC found no perversity or illegality in the trial court's reasoning and declined to interfere, affirming the accused's right to refund and dismissing the petition.
The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the trial court's order directing refund of the Rs.1,00,000 deposited under s.143A of the N.I. Act to the accused/appellant. The appellate court had set aside the conviction and compensation order, leaving no subsisting order against the accused; consequently the deposited amount cannot be retained or adjusted as interim compensation in a fresh complaint filed under s.142(1)(b) of the N.I. Act absent any interlocutory order granting such relief. The HC found no perversity or illegality in the trial court's reasoning and declined to interfere, affirming the accused's right to refund and dismissing the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
