Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
Page of 4883
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 97649 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NDPS - Power to seize and arrest of a person in a public place - Smuggling - Ganja - Samples being taken at the CGST Bhawan - The High Court found that the officers involved were duly authorized and acted within their powers under the NDPS Act. It was established that the search and seizure were conducted in compliance with Section 43 of the NDPS Act, which pertains to actions in public places. The Court held that the procedural requirements were met, including the immediate forwarding of seized items for chemical analysis and the safekeeping of the seized narcotics. - The appeals of appellants directly involved with the narcotics in the truck were dismissed, and their convictions were upheld based on the corroborative evidence of seizure and compliance with the NDPS procedural requirements. The appeals of two appellants, argued to be not present at the scene and implicated mainly through inadmissible confessional statements, were allowed, and their convictions were set aside.
NDPS - Power to seize and arrest of a person in a public place - Smuggling - Ganja - Samples being taken at the CGST Bhawan - The High Court found that the officers involved were duly authorized and acted within their powers under the NDPS Act. It was established that the search and seizure were conducted in compliance with Section 43 of the NDPS Act, which pertains to actions in public places. The Court held that the procedural requirements were met, including the immediate forwarding of seized items for chemical analysis and the safekeeping of the seized narcotics. - The appeals of appellants directly involved with the narcotics in the truck were dismissed, and their convictions were upheld based on the corroborative evidence of seizure and compliance with the NDPS procedural requirements. The appeals of two appellants, argued to be not present at the scene and implicated mainly through inadmissible confessional statements, were allowed, and their convictions were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4883 
