Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Bail was granted in a GST prosecution for alleged fraudulent input tax credit because continued custody was found unwarranted on a cumulative assessment of bail factors. The Court relied on the petitioner's four months in custody, absence of criminal antecedents, the essentially documentary nature of the prosecution case, and the absence of material showing risk of tampering, witness influence, or non-cooperation. It also noted that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon and that the right to speedy trial is protected under Article 21. The Court held that economic offence allegations alone did not justify further incarceration and directed release on conditions to secure presence and protect the trial.
Bail was granted in a GST prosecution for alleged fraudulent input tax credit because continued custody was found unwarranted on a cumulative assessment of bail factors. The Court relied on the petitioner's four months in custody, absence of criminal antecedents, the essentially documentary nature of the prosecution case, and the absence of material showing risk of tampering, witness influence, or non-cooperation. It also noted that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon and that the right to speedy trial is protected under Article 21. The Court held that economic offence allegations alone did not justify further incarceration and directed release on conditions to secure presence and protect the trial.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.