Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
The dominant issue was whether a deed clause and related pleadings created a "contract of guarantee" under s.126 of the Contract Act so as to support initiation of CIRP against the alleged surety under s.7 of the IBC. The Court held that a guarantee requires an unambiguous undertaking to discharge a third party's liability upon default; a limited statement in mortgage-enforcement pleadings that liability was confined to the mortgaged property did not establish such a guarantee, and case law on admissions under s.58 of the Evidence Act was inapplicable. Consequently, the rejection of the s.7 application was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. - SC
The dominant issue was whether a deed clause and related pleadings created a "contract of guarantee" under s.126 of the Contract Act so as to support initiation of CIRP against the alleged surety under s.7 of the IBC. The Court held that a guarantee requires an unambiguous undertaking to discharge a third party's liability upon default; a limited statement in mortgage-enforcement pleadings that liability was confined to the mortgaged property did not establish such a guarantee, and case law on admissions under s.58 of the Evidence Act was inapplicable. Consequently, the rejection of the s.7 application was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
