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...
The High Court allowed the bail application u/s 439 of CrPC read with Section 45 of PMLA. The applicant was accused of fraudulently obtaining import authorization in the name of his benami entities by cheating government authorities with wrongful gain intent. However, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) did not comply with Section 19 of PMLA by not summoning or recording the applicant's statement before arrest. ED's opinion on the applicant's guilt was based on an inadmissible co-accused statement. The court held that non-compliance with Section 19 mandates benefited the arrested person. Since no further custodial interrogation was required, the court granted bail without opining on the merits.
The High Court allowed the bail application u/s 439 of CrPC read with Section 45 of PMLA. The applicant was accused of fraudulently obtaining import authorization in the name of his benami entities by cheating government authorities with wrongful gain intent. However, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) did not comply with Section 19 of PMLA by not summoning or recording the applicant's statement before arrest. ED's opinion on the applicant's guilt was based on an inadmissible co-accused statement. The court held that non-compliance with Section 19 mandates benefited the arrested person. Since no further custodial interrogation was required, the court granted bail without opining on the merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
