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...
SC held that dealing in "Buprenorphine Hydrochloride" constitutes an offense under Section 8 of the NDPS Act, regardless of its listing in Schedule I of NDPS Rules. The Court determined that psychotropic substances in the Act's Schedule pose significant societal risks. The decision in Sanjeev V. Deshpande is retrospectively applicable, clarifying existing law without creating a new offense. The Court found that both Trial Court and High Court erroneously discharged charges under Section 216 CrPC. Consequently, the High Court's orders were set aside, and the appeal was allowed, reinstating the original charges against the accused.
SC held that dealing in "Buprenorphine Hydrochloride" constitutes an offense under Section 8 of the NDPS Act, regardless of its listing in Schedule I of NDPS Rules. The Court determined that psychotropic substances in the Act's Schedule pose significant societal risks. The decision in Sanjeev V. Deshpande is retrospectively applicable, clarifying existing law without creating a new offense. The Court found that both Trial Court and High Court erroneously discharged charges under Section 216 CrPC. Consequently, the High Court's orders were set aside, and the appeal was allowed, reinstating the original charges against the accused.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
