Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC held that the inquiry report issued by the second respondent is vitiated and set aside, and the disciplinary proceedings have abated for failure to comply with the mandatory timelines prescribed by Reg.17(1) and Reg.17(5) of the CBLR, 2018. The court found the inquiry report dated 27.6.2025 was submitted and not communicated within the statutory 90-day period, thereby depriving the petitioner of a timely copy and rendering subsequent action ultra vires; estoppel could not be invoked to cure the statutory breach. Given abatement, the HC declined to adjudicate the separate contention concerning the right to cross-examine witnesses; petition allowed.
HC held that the inquiry report issued by the second respondent is vitiated and set aside, and the disciplinary proceedings have abated for failure to comply with the mandatory timelines prescribed by Reg.17(1) and Reg.17(5) of the CBLR, 2018. The court found the inquiry report dated 27.6.2025 was submitted and not communicated within the statutory 90-day period, thereby depriving the petitioner of a timely copy and rendering subsequent action ultra vires; estoppel could not be invoked to cure the statutory breach. Given abatement, the HC declined to adjudicate the separate contention concerning the right to cross-examine witnesses; petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.