Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
In a prosecution under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the High Court held that pre-trial custody must remain exceptional because liberty cannot be curtailed on a punitive basis before conviction. Bail was granted after noting that the maximum sentence was five years, the matter was triable by a Magistrate, investigation was complete, complaint had been filed, there was no criminal antecedent or material showing risk of tampering, intimidation, flight, or non-cooperation, and the case was largely documentary. The Court also considered that charge had not been framed and trial was unlikely to conclude soon, so continued detention would amount to punitive custody rather than securing the trial.
In a prosecution under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the High Court held that pre-trial custody must remain exceptional because liberty cannot be curtailed on a punitive basis before conviction. Bail was granted after noting that the maximum sentence was five years, the matter was triable by a Magistrate, investigation was complete, complaint had been filed, there was no criminal antecedent or material showing risk of tampering, intimidation, flight, or non-cooperation, and the case was largely documentary. The Court also considered that charge had not been framed and trial was unlikely to conclude soon, so continued detention would amount to punitive custody rather than securing the trial.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
