Demand notice Archives

Del HC directs fresh adjudication in a case involving mixed question of fact and law, as it found relevant submissions were not considered by AO

Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of Manmohan and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ. disposed the petition and directed fresh adjudication as

Business News News

SEBI issues over Rs 2 Crores demand notice to Anand Subramanian: Know the Reason

Mr Anand Subramanian had been asked to pay a sum of Rs 2,04,87,575 (Rupees Two Crore Four Lakh Eighty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Logix Insolvent? NCLT initiates insolvency proceedings against Logix City Developers

National Company Law Tribunal: The Coram of Bachu Venkat Balaram Das (Judicial Member) and Narender Kumar Bhola (Technical Member) initiates insolvency proceedings

Case Briefs District Court

Daughter-in-law accuses father-in-law of offence under S. 138 NI Act. Here’s the detailed account of whether father-in-law gave the cheque to daughter-in-law or was it taken without his knowledge || Saket District Court decides

Saket District Court, Delhi: Sonam Singh, MM (NI Act) acquitted the accused who was charged with an offence under Section 138 of

Case Briefs District Court

When does burden of proof shift to accused to rebut statutory presumption in cheque bounce cases under S. 138 NI Act? CMM Court considers

Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: Bhola Pandit, XX Addl. CMM, convicted a person who presented a cheque to

Case Briefs District Court

“Account closed” and Cheque returned: Is it a reason sufficient for convicting a person under S. 138 NI Act? Read detailed decision of CMM Court, Bangalore

Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: In light of cheque being returned by the bank due to “Account Closed”

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCLAT | Existence of Dispute prior to issuance of Demand Notice-NCLT and NCLAT in rhythm, rejects appeal

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Coram of Ashok Bhushan, J (Chairperson), Jarat Kumar Jain, J (Judicial) and Dr Ashok Kumar

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCDRC | Builder unilaterally, high-handedly cancels sale agreement on not handing over timely possession: Commission decides builder-buyer dispute, levies interest to be paid by builder

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): Coram of C. Viswanath (Presiding Member) and Justice Ram Surat Ram Maurya (Member) decided an issue

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCLAT | Insolvency process proceeded without ‘Demand Notice’ being served under S. 8 IBC due to change in ‘registered address’. Does Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code allow to proceed in such circumstances? Read on

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Division Bench of Venugopal M (Judicial Member) and Alok Srivastava (Technical Member) held that a

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

CESTAT | Services availed amounts to input services to be eligible for credit; Tribunal allows appeal

Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of S.S. Garg (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) allowed

Case Briefs High Courts

Tri HC | What is the purpose of a serving a ‘Statutory Notice’ under Negotiable Instruments Act? Detailed analysis of significance of ‘Statutory Presumption’

Tripura High Court: S.G. Chattopadhyay, J., highlights the essence of the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, in light of the object of a

Case Briefs High Courts

Ker HC | Can demand notices issued under S. 13(2) of SARFAESI Act be challenged invoking writ jurisdiction of High Courts? Court considers

Kerala High Court: A.M. Badar, J., while addressing the instant matter held that, demand notices under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act can

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCLAT reiterates IBC is beneficial legislation intended to put Corporate Debtor on its feet, not a mere money recovery legislation

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Bench of Justice Bansi Lal Bhat (Acting Chairperson) and Justice Anant Bijay Sing (Judicial Member) and

Case Briefs High Courts

[Dishonour of Cheque] MP HC | Director/MD/JD/other officers and employees of a company can not be prosecuted under S. 138 of NI Act unless the company is impleaded as an accused

Madhya Pradesh High Court: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J., while addressing a matter with regard to dishonour of cheque held that, Director/Managing Director/Joint Director/other

Case Briefs High Courts

Bom HC | The day on which accused refused to accept the demand notice is to be excluded while counting the 15 days period contemplated under S. 138(c) NI Act

Bombay High Court: Vibha Kankanwadi, J., while allowing a writ petition, quashed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCLAT | Demand notice issued under S. 8 IBC against Corporate Debtor for dues of sister concern/group company is not valid

National Company Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Bench of Justice A.I.S Cheema, Member (Judicial), Kanthi Narahari, Member (Technical) and V.P. Singh, Member (Technical), allowed

Case Briefs High Courts

Ker HC | Service of notice of demand for the cheque amount is condition precedent for filing a complaint about offence under S. 138 of NI Act

Kerala High Court: R. Narayana Pisharadi, J. dismissed a petition seeking to quash a complaint filed under Section 142 of the Negotiable

Case Briefs High Courts

Jhar HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act can be filed only after 45 days from date of dispatch of demand notice

Jharkhand High Court: Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. dismissed an interlocutory application praying for grant of special leave under Section 378(4) of the

Case Briefs High Courts

Tri HC | Purpose of demand notice under S. 138 NI Act – not to demand payment, but to inform the party of broken contract and liability to pay

Tripura High Court: The Bench of Arindam Lodh, J. allowed a revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Code

Case Briefs Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCLT | TATA Chemicals’ petition under IBC Code dismissed with heavy cost of Rs 10 lakhs, for being filed with ulterior motive

National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench: This Bench comprising Mr V.P. Singh and Mr Ravikumar Duraisamy as members dismissed a petition filed