Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
HC granted interim bail to petitioner arrested under Section 132(1) of Assam GST Act, 2017 for allegedly passing Input Tax Credit on invoices without actual supply of goods. Court held arrest procedurally infirm due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Section 41/41-A CrPC corresponding to Section 35(3) BNSS. Though grounds of arrest were communicated under Section 69 CGST Act, authorities failed to communicate "reasons to believe" to petitioner, which constitutes substantive safeguard rather than mere formality. Court noted petitioner remained in judicial custody since 10.06.2025 without any prayer for custodial interrogation or police remand by authorities. Non-communication of foundational reasons vitiated arrest process and undermined legal safeguards, rendering arrest procedurally defective warranting interim bail relief.
HC granted interim bail to petitioner arrested under Section 132(1) of Assam GST Act, 2017 for allegedly passing Input Tax Credit on invoices without actual supply of goods. Court held arrest procedurally infirm due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Section 41/41-A CrPC corresponding to Section 35(3) BNSS. Though grounds of arrest were communicated under Section 69 CGST Act, authorities failed to communicate "reasons to believe" to petitioner, which constitutes substantive safeguard rather than mere formality. Court noted petitioner remained in judicial custody since 10.06.2025 without any prayer for custodial interrogation or police remand by authorities. Non-communication of foundational reasons vitiated arrest process and undermined legal safeguards, rendering arrest procedurally defective warranting interim bail relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.