Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96207 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Judicial review of arrest under special statutes is limited to examining compliance with statutory and constitutional safeguards, not the sufficiency of the material supporting the arresting authority's belief. On the record, the Court noted that reasons to believe and grounds of arrest were documented, digitally signed, served in Hindi, and acknowledged, while arrest intimation was also communicated to the petitioner's wife; it therefore found no violation of Articles 21 or 22. The remand order was upheld because the Magistrate expressly recorded compliance with Sections 47 and 48 of the BNSS and found the arrest justified, so the objection that it was non-speaking or contrary to natural justice failed.
Judicial review of arrest under special statutes is limited to examining compliance with statutory and constitutional safeguards, not the sufficiency of the material supporting the arresting authority's belief. On the record, the Court noted that reasons to believe and grounds of arrest were documented, digitally signed, served in Hindi, and acknowledged, while arrest intimation was also communicated to the petitioner's wife; it therefore found no violation of Articles 21 or 22. The remand order was upheld because the Magistrate expressly recorded compliance with Sections 47 and 48 of the BNSS and found the arrest justified, so the objection that it was non-speaking or contrary to natural justice failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.