Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court suspended petitioners from service for allegedly accepting illegal gratification. The suspension orders were stayed by the Court twice. As more than eight months had passed without the suspension taking effect, petitioners were allowed to continue in service pending disciplinary proceedings. The charge memos were issued, and disciplinary actions initiated. Petitioners not affected by suspension were permitted to work, subject to ongoing proceedings. The suspension orders were deemed ineffective, and petitioners could continue in service with possible reassignment. The Tribunal's challenged orders were not enforced. Petitioners' service continued with posting orders. Petition disposed of.
The High Court suspended petitioners from service for allegedly accepting illegal gratification. The suspension orders were stayed by the Court twice. As more than eight months had passed without the suspension taking effect, petitioners were allowed to continue in service pending disciplinary proceedings. The charge memos were issued, and disciplinary actions initiated. Petitioners not affected by suspension were permitted to work, subject to ongoing proceedings. The suspension orders were deemed ineffective, and petitioners could continue in service with possible reassignment. The Tribunal's challenged orders were not enforced. Petitioners' service continued with posting orders. Petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.