Administrative fraud classification suspension does not halt independent criminal investigation or warrant-based searches into alleged economic offenc...
Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Page of 4788
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
481 to 500 of 95752 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Calcutta High Court considered a case involving the clandestine removal of wire rods and the levy of a penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The court noted the lack of specific findings on the confiscable nature of the goods and the failure to follow a previous order. The appellant provided details of brokers and transporters involved. The tribunal found the penalty justified based on various evidence, including computerized records and statements. The appellate authority upheld the penalty, considering the lack of invoice evidence and rejecting a belated retraction. The court referred to the Supreme Court decision on voluntary confessional statements. The tribunal affirmed the findings, distinguishing a previous case. Ultimately, the court found no substantial legal questions, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
The Calcutta High Court considered a case involving the clandestine removal of wire rods and the levy of a penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The court noted the lack of specific findings on the confiscable nature of the goods and the failure to follow a previous order. The appellant provided details of brokers and transporters involved. The tribunal found the penalty justified based on various evidence, including computerized records and statements. The appellate authority upheld the penalty, considering the lack of invoice evidence and rejecting a belated retraction. The court referred to the Supreme Court decision on voluntary confessional statements. The tribunal affirmed the findings, distinguishing a previous case. Ultimately, the court found no substantial legal questions, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.