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...
A complaint under s.138 NI Act was held not maintainable because the statutory demand notice was issued about seven months after dishonour, beyond the 30-day mandate in s.138(b), so no valid cause of action arose. Independently, the complaint was treated as time-barred since cognizance of a delayed complaint under s.142(b) requires an application showing sufficient cause and an order condoning delay, which were absent, rendering cognizance illegal; the complaint was therefore liable to rejection. The defence that the cheque was a "security cheque" raised disputed facts and, in any event, a security cheque can mature into enforceable liability. Territorial jurisdiction was upheld as the payee's bank branch fell within jurisdiction. Petition allowed. - HC
A complaint under s.138 NI Act was held not maintainable because the statutory demand notice was issued about seven months after dishonour, beyond the 30-day mandate in s.138(b), so no valid cause of action arose. Independently, the complaint was treated as time-barred since cognizance of a delayed complaint under s.142(b) requires an application showing sufficient cause and an order condoning delay, which were absent, rendering cognizance illegal; the complaint was therefore liable to rejection. The defence that the cheque was a "security cheque" raised disputed facts and, in any event, a security cheque can mature into enforceable liability. Territorial jurisdiction was upheld as the payee's bank branch fell within jurisdiction. Petition allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
