Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
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.