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...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96000 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 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
