Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The SC set aside both the original bail order and subsequent modification order due to the petitioner's contradictory conduct regarding a Rs. 50,00,000 deposit condition. The petitioner initially offered the monetary deposit through counsel, secured bail modification allowing payment post-release, then repudiated the offer claiming counsel lacked authority and the condition was onerous. The Court held that while excessive bail constitutes no bail and onerous conditions should be avoided, parties cannot "approbate and reprobate" or manipulate judicial proceedings. The matter was remitted to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits. Despite the petitioner's conduct warranting re-incarceration, limited interim protection from surrender was granted. The Chief Justice of Madras HC was directed to place the matter before appropriate court by 30.06.2025. SLP disposed.
The SC set aside both the original bail order and subsequent modification order due to the petitioner's contradictory conduct regarding a Rs. 50,00,000 deposit condition. The petitioner initially offered the monetary deposit through counsel, secured bail modification allowing payment post-release, then repudiated the offer claiming counsel lacked authority and the condition was onerous. The Court held that while excessive bail constitutes no bail and onerous conditions should be avoided, parties cannot "approbate and reprobate" or manipulate judicial proceedings. The matter was remitted to the High Court for fresh consideration on merits. Despite the petitioner's conduct warranting re-incarceration, limited interim protection from surrender was granted. The Chief Justice of Madras HC was directed to place the matter before appropriate court by 30.06.2025. SLP disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
