Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Legal principles governing the initiation of criminal proceedings and the implications of settlement or immunity orders on such proceedings. It clarifies that mere registration of an FIR does not constitute initiation of proceedings; cognizance is taken only after a final report u/s 173(2) of CrPC. The court discusses a precedent where continuation of prosecution was deemed inconsistent with the intent of a settlement scheme. It further examines the impact of an immunity order granted to the appellant company, concluding that pursuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process since the basis of allegations was non-existent. Consequently, the impugned order taking cognizance against the appellant company is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.
Legal principles governing the initiation of criminal proceedings and the implications of settlement or immunity orders on such proceedings. It clarifies that mere registration of an FIR does not constitute initiation of proceedings; cognizance is taken only after a final report u/s 173(2) of CrPC. The court discusses a precedent where continuation of prosecution was deemed inconsistent with the intent of a settlement scheme. It further examines the impact of an immunity order granted to the appellant company, concluding that pursuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process since the basis of allegations was non-existent. Consequently, the impugned order taking cognizance against the appellant company is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.