Marketing support and subcontracted client contracts: no agency permanent establishment under Article 5 DTAA; arm's-length pricing bars profit attribu...
Cognizance of a time-barred complaint under s.138 NI Act was held impermissible unless the court first records satisfaction of "sufficient cause" and condones the delay, as the proviso makes condonation a condition precedent and limitation-linked proceedings do not validly enter the court's file without such condonation. The view that condonation and cognizance are interchangeable was rejected as contrary to the statutory mandate, particularly where the complainant wrongly asserted timely filing. The magistrate's cognizance taken before condoning a two-day delay was set aside and the refusal to quash was reversed; appeal allowed. - SC
Cognizance of a time-barred complaint under s.138 NI Act was held impermissible unless the court first records satisfaction of "sufficient cause" and condones the delay, as the proviso makes condonation a condition precedent and limitation-linked proceedings do not validly enter the court's file without such condonation. The view that condonation and cognizance are interchangeable was rejected as contrary to the statutory mandate, particularly where the complainant wrongly asserted timely filing. The magistrate's cognizance taken before condoning a two-day delay was set aside and the refusal to quash was reversed; appeal allowed. - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
