Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The NCLAT upheld the impugned order dated 02.04.2025, affirming it as a continuation of prior directions rather than a review or recall prohibited under Section 420(2) of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal found no justification for conducting a Secretarial Audit given the absence of evidence that financial statements were ever filed with the ROC for the period 2015-2023. The appellant failed to produce any material disputing the PCS report, which confirmed that the company was non-operational and thus ineligible for such audit. The appellant's reliance on pleadings without judicial scrutiny or evidential support was rejected. Consequently, the order dispensing with the Secretarial Audit was deemed judicious and based on a proper appreciation of the record. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety for lack of merit.
The NCLAT upheld the impugned order dated 02.04.2025, affirming it as a continuation of prior directions rather than a review or recall prohibited under Section 420(2) of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal found no justification for conducting a Secretarial Audit given the absence of evidence that financial statements were ever filed with the ROC for the period 2015-2023. The appellant failed to produce any material disputing the PCS report, which confirmed that the company was non-operational and thus ineligible for such audit. The appellant's reliance on pleadings without judicial scrutiny or evidential support was rejected. Consequently, the order dispensing with the Secretarial Audit was deemed judicious and based on a proper appreciation of the record. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety for lack of merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
