Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
The appellant was granted bail in the Excise Policy case due to prolonged incarceration and denial of the right to speedy trial, despite the seriousness of the allegations. The Supreme Court observed that the trial was unlikely to conclude anytime soon, given the voluminous evidence and witnesses involved. Keeping the appellant incarcerated indefinitely would violate their fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The court noted the appellant's deep societal roots and imposed conditions like furnishing bail bonds to address concerns about tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The High Court's order denying bail was quashed, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,00,000 with two sureties of the same amount.
The appellant was granted bail in the Excise Policy case due to prolonged incarceration and denial of the right to speedy trial, despite the seriousness of the allegations. The Supreme Court observed that the trial was unlikely to conclude anytime soon, given the voluminous evidence and witnesses involved. Keeping the appellant incarcerated indefinitely would violate their fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The court noted the appellant's deep societal roots and imposed conditions like furnishing bail bonds to address concerns about tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The High Court's order denying bail was quashed, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,00,000 with two sureties of the same amount.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
