Posts

Showing posts from April 25, 2024

legal terrain of cost of funds |

Image
Cost of funds Title: Understanding the Legal Implications of Cost of Funds: A Case Analysis In the complex world of legal proceedings, cases often involve the careful interpretation of statutes, precedents and legal principles. One such case that highlights the complexities of financial disputes and legal provisions is United Bank Limited v. Muhammad Amjad Hayat Khan. This case highlights the concept of "cost of funds" and its legal implications within the framework of financial institutions and financial recovery. The dispute arose when the defendant Muhammad Amjad Hayat Khan filed a suit against United Bank Limited (the appellant) for recovery of a sum of Rs.10,000. 4,73,945.21. Initially, the bank's case for recovery against Khan was dismissed, but Khan later took legal action to claim the money, arguing that he was entitled to profits on the funds held by the bank. The main point of contention in this case revolves around the concept of "cost of funds". Cost

Validity of impugned notices | Judicial Review of Tax Assessment: A Case Study Analysis |

Image
High Court set aside the impugned notices and directed the Punjab revenue. authority to conduct a proper inquiry High Court set aside the impugned notices and directed the Punjab revenue. authority to conduct a proper inquiry Title: Judicial Review of Tax Assessment: A Case Study Analysis The recent judgment delivered by Justice Jawad Hassan in W.P. No. 4290 of 2023 sheds light on the legal intricacies surrounding the issuance of show cause notices under the Punjab Sales Tax on Services Act, 2012 ("the Act"). The case, along with connected petitions, presents a significant examination of the vires of show cause notices issued by the Punjab Revenue Authority, Government of Punjab, under Section 24(2) of the Act. The petitioners, taxpayers subject to the impugned notices, contested their validity on several grounds. They argued that the estimates provided by the authority were based on assumptions contrary to the data already submitted in their tax returns under Section 35 of t