Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
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.