Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that the arrest of the Applicant for offences under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), 132(1)(i), and 132(2) read with Section 132(5) of the CGST Act was illegal due to non-compliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. The DGGI failed to prove that the Applicant was informed of the grounds of arrest at the time of detention, as mandated. Consequently, the Applicant's custodial detention was declared unlawful. The court granted regular bail upon the Applicant executing a P.R. bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Pune. The bail application was accordingly allowed.
The HC held that the arrest of the Applicant for offences under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), 132(1)(i), and 132(2) read with Section 132(5) of the CGST Act was illegal due to non-compliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 50 of the Cr.P.C. The DGGI failed to prove that the Applicant was informed of the grounds of arrest at the time of detention, as mandated. Consequently, the Applicant's custodial detention was declared unlawful. The court granted regular bail upon the Applicant executing a P.R. bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the CJM, Pune. The bail application was accordingly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
