Tax determination against deceased proprietor invalid where no notice to legal representative; appeal rejected without addressing jurisdictional defec...
Revocation of GST registration and permission to file blocked returns; conditional defreezing of bank accounts after security and instalment applicati...
Right to access seized electronic evidence: impugned adjudication treated as additional show cause notice, remand for fresh hearing and return of mate...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6581 to 6600 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In a cheque dishonour appeal against acquittal, the court held that interference with an acquittal is warranted only if the view is perverse or based on misreading/omission of material evidence, and a plausible view must be respected. Although the accused admitted the cheque signature, the complainant's cross-examination rendered his financial capacity doubtful, displacing the presumption of legally enforceable liability. Further, the loan was alleged to have been advanced in 2014 without specific dates, while the cheque was issued in November 2017; on these pleadings the cheque related to a time-barred debt and did not attract Section 138 NI Act, rendering the complaint not maintainable. Non-compliance with Section 269SS IT Act did not justify adverse inference; the appeal was dismissed - HC
In a cheque dishonour appeal against acquittal, the court held that interference with an acquittal is warranted only if the view is perverse or based on misreading/omission of material evidence, and a plausible view must be respected. Although the accused admitted the cheque signature, the complainant's cross-examination rendered his financial capacity doubtful, displacing the presumption of legally enforceable liability. Further, the loan was alleged to have been advanced in 2014 without specific dates, while the cheque was issued in November 2017; on these pleadings the cheque related to a time-barred debt and did not attract Section 138 NI Act, rendering the complaint not maintainable. Non-compliance with Section 269SS IT Act did not justify adverse inference; the appeal was dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
