Marketing support and subcontracted client contracts: no agency permanent establishment under Article 5 DTAA; arm's-length pricing bars profit attribu...
Transfer pricing comparables selection and working capital adjustment u/r 10B(1)(e)(iii), remanded for recomputation with rejected comparables include...
The dominant issue was whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita could be invoked to quash a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act after the criminal revision had been finally decided. The Court held that final adjudication of a criminal revision exhausts the Court's power to reopen the conviction through inherent jurisdiction; earlier single-judge authority suggesting otherwise was not accepted as permitting such post-revisional interference, and a contrary view in a later case was treated as fact-specific and not laying down a binding principle. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, reserving liberty to pursue permissible remedies. - HC
The dominant issue was whether inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita could be invoked to quash a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act after the criminal revision had been finally decided. The Court held that final adjudication of a criminal revision exhausts the Court's power to reopen the conviction through inherent jurisdiction; earlier single-judge authority suggesting otherwise was not accepted as permitting such post-revisional interference, and a contrary view in a later case was treated as fact-specific and not laying down a binding principle. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, reserving liberty to pursue permissible remedies. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.