As the applicant is not a signatory to the cheque, no liability can be fastened upon him for the dishonour of the cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Government has introduced new section 269ST limiting cash transactions above Rs. 2 lakhs. There are no exceptions to this. Even gift received in cash form close relatives above Rs. 2 lakhs come under the ambit of this section. At present there are also certain other provisions which have either a cap or a complete ban on cash transactions.
Indian Bank’s Association (IBA) invites applications from eligible Chartered Accountant Firms for empanelment to take up assignments relating to forensic audit of Frauds upto Rs. 50 crores & Frauds above Rs. 50 crores in the Banking Industry.
Government reduces number of forms and Reports from 36 to 12 to lessen costs and compliance burden of various establishments.
NOTIFICATION NO. 34/2017-Customs (N.T.), Central Board of Excise and Customs hereby appoints officers mentioned in column (6) to act as a Common Adjudicating Authority to exercise powers and discharge duties conferred or imposed on officers mentioned
No. 14/9/2016-DGAD.—Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules,
This Appeal under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 23rd April, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2008- 09.
In our view, Questions No.2 and 3 seeks to raise an issue of law, which, already stands covered against the Revenue. We are, in respectful agreement, with the views taken by the Karnataka and Allahabad High Courts, as articulated in their respective judgments to which reference is made hereinabove.
It is essential to protect the Confidential Financial Data filed by millions of Tax Payers from falling into wrong hands in the larger public interest.
Non-appearance of the supplier in absence of any other corroborate evidence cannot be sole basis to justify the stand of the Revenue that a transaction of purchase is bogus
