Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
The HC declined to adjudicate on the petitioner's role in the underlying business and, without deciding merits, authorised forensic analysis of the seized CPU subject to strict protective conditions to prevent access to third-party client data. The CPU, seized during a raid at a firm in which the petitioner's parents are partners, shall be inspected on 11 and 12 September 2025 from 11:00 onwards in the presence of designated persons and IT experts. The Court fixed a lump-sum fee of Rs.1,00,000 per HC IT official, to be borne equally by the petitioner and the revenue authority. Matter listed for further hearing on 30 October 2025.
The HC declined to adjudicate on the petitioner's role in the underlying business and, without deciding merits, authorised forensic analysis of the seized CPU subject to strict protective conditions to prevent access to third-party client data. The CPU, seized during a raid at a firm in which the petitioner's parents are partners, shall be inspected on 11 and 12 September 2025 from 11:00 onwards in the presence of designated persons and IT experts. The Court fixed a lump-sum fee of Rs.1,00,000 per HC IT official, to be borne equally by the petitioner and the revenue authority. Matter listed for further hearing on 30 October 2025.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.