Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The HC quashed the proceedings initiated under the PMLA against the petitioners, holding that the order taking cognizance violated the mandatory first proviso to Section 223(1) of the BNSS, which guarantees the accused a pre-cognizance opportunity of hearing. The Court held that denial of this right vitiates the cognizance itself, rendering all subsequent proceedings null and void, without requiring the accused to prove prejudice or miscarriage of justice. It further rejected the argument that PMLA complaints are akin to charge sheets, affirming they are true complaints subject to BNSS provisions. The omission of explicit reference to complaints under special laws in Section 223 does not exclude the operation of the first proviso. The Court also ruled that inconsistent concessions by the ED are irrelevant to statutory interpretation. Consequently, the impugned cognizance order was declared legally invalid and set aside.
The HC quashed the proceedings initiated under the PMLA against the petitioners, holding that the order taking cognizance violated the mandatory first proviso to Section 223(1) of the BNSS, which guarantees the accused a pre-cognizance opportunity of hearing. The Court held that denial of this right vitiates the cognizance itself, rendering all subsequent proceedings null and void, without requiring the accused to prove prejudice or miscarriage of justice. It further rejected the argument that PMLA complaints are akin to charge sheets, affirming they are true complaints subject to BNSS provisions. The omission of explicit reference to complaints under special laws in Section 223 does not exclude the operation of the first proviso. The Court also ruled that inconsistent concessions by the ED are irrelevant to statutory interpretation. Consequently, the impugned cognizance order was declared legally invalid and set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
