Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
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.