https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105522 A litigant cannot introduce a new, inconsistent defence at the appellate stage by amendment or additional evidence when the written statement was confined to squaring up and repayment. The Court held that a plea that securities transactions were void as against public policy could not be entertained because it contradicted the pleaded case and had not been raised before the trial forum. The record also showed no material that the transactions were fictitious, derived-price transactions, or otherwise illegal, and the RBI circulars relied on did not make them void against the respondent. The findings that the transactions were not squared up or repaid were therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 30 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Sep 2013 10:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105522 A litigant cannot introduce a new, inconsistent defence at the appellate stage by amendment or additional evidence when the written statement was confined to squaring up and repayment. The Court held that a plea that securities transactions were void as against public policy could not be entertained because it contradicted the pleaded case and had not been raised before the trial forum. The record also showed no material that the transactions were fictitious, derived-price transactions, or otherwise illegal, and the RBI circulars relied on did not make them void against the respondent. The findings that the transactions were not squared up or repaid were therefore upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 30 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105522