https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296071 The court held that a money lender's suit is not dismissed for lack of a registration certificate at the time of the transaction. It suffices for the money lender to produce a valid registration certificate during the suit. The court emphasized the legislative intent of revenue regulation and distinguished between penalties for revenue protection and those prohibiting contracts. Precedents like *Johnson v. Hudson* and *Cope v. Rowlands* were cited to support the conclusion that the absence of a registration certificate at the transaction time does not invalidate the loan. en-us Thu, 28 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Jul 2021 17:04:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296071 The court held that a money lender's suit is not dismissed for lack of a registration certificate at the time of the transaction. It suffices for the money lender to produce a valid registration certificate during the suit. The court emphasized the legislative intent of revenue regulation and distinguished between penalties for revenue protection and those prohibiting contracts. Precedents like *Johnson v. Hudson* and *Cope v. Rowlands* were cited to support the conclusion that the absence of a registration certificate at the transaction time does not invalidate the loan. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 28 Sep 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296071