Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The first proviso to Section 223(1) of the BNSS is mandatory, so the accused must be heard before cognizance is taken; safeguards under the Income-tax Act do not displace that requirement. The court applied the rule that a statutory act prescribed in a particular manner must be done only in that manner, and rejected the argument that pre-cognizance hearing is an empty formality. Because cognizance was taken after the BNSS came into force, Section 531 did not preserve the earlier procedure, and the applicable BNSS procedure governed. Non-compliance was therefore an illegality vitiating the proceedings, so the cognizance orders were set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the accused.
The first proviso to Section 223(1) of the BNSS is mandatory, so the accused must be heard before cognizance is taken; safeguards under the Income-tax Act do not displace that requirement. The court applied the rule that a statutory act prescribed in a particular manner must be done only in that manner, and rejected the argument that pre-cognizance hearing is an empty formality. Because cognizance was taken after the BNSS came into force, Section 531 did not preserve the earlier procedure, and the applicable BNSS procedure governed. Non-compliance was therefore an illegality vitiating the proceedings, so the cognizance orders were set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the accused.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
