Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The HC allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 5 Sept 2024. It held that the Central Government validly activated SFIO pursuant to a representation by the resolution professional appointed by the NCLT, and that on 2 Aug 2021 Respondent Nos. 1-2 were legitimately subject to SFIO criminal investigation under s.447 of the Companies Act, 2013, satisfying clause 6(h) of the memorandum. The HC further held that a bank need not await declaration of an account as "fraud" under the Master Directions on Frauds before issuing a Look Out Circular; a bank may issue an LOC to preserve criminal prosecution, and there were no grounds to restrain Bank of Baroda.
The HC allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 5 Sept 2024. It held that the Central Government validly activated SFIO pursuant to a representation by the resolution professional appointed by the NCLT, and that on 2 Aug 2021 Respondent Nos. 1-2 were legitimately subject to SFIO criminal investigation under s.447 of the Companies Act, 2013, satisfying clause 6(h) of the memorandum. The HC further held that a bank need not await declaration of an account as "fraud" under the Master Directions on Frauds before issuing a Look Out Circular; a bank may issue an LOC to preserve criminal prosecution, and there were no grounds to restrain Bank of Baroda.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
