Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
SC determined the rights of a shipping line in a contempt proceeding, finding the impleadment of the appellant as a party was unlawful. The court set aside orders dated 17.02.2022, 04.03.2022, and 18.04.2022, which improperly adjudicated the appellant's rights in a contempt petition originally filed against customs department officers. The court held that determining the shipping line's rights in a contempt proceeding where it was not an original party was unwarranted and procedurally incorrect. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, nullifying the challenged orders and restoring the procedural status quo.
SC determined the rights of a shipping line in a contempt proceeding, finding the impleadment of the appellant as a party was unlawful. The court set aside orders dated 17.02.2022, 04.03.2022, and 18.04.2022, which improperly adjudicated the appellant's rights in a contempt petition originally filed against customs department officers. The court held that determining the shipping line's rights in a contempt proceeding where it was not an original party was unwarranted and procedurally incorrect. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, nullifying the challenged orders and restoring the procedural status quo.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.