Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
HC granted regular bail to the Applicant, observing that he was arrested from his residence without prior service of summons or notice under s.41A CrPC or s.35 BNSS, and that the investigation against him is complete with the complaint already filed. The court applied established Apex Court principles for offences under s.132(1)(c),(f),(h) CGST Act, noting limited statutory maximum sentence, documentary nature of evidence, absence of criminal antecedents, custody since 04.06.2025, and negligible risk of tampering or witness influence. No extraordinary circumstances justified continued detention. Bail was allowed subject to compliance with the conditions imposed by the HC.
HC granted regular bail to the Applicant, observing that he was arrested from his residence without prior service of summons or notice under s.41A CrPC or s.35 BNSS, and that the investigation against him is complete with the complaint already filed. The court applied established Apex Court principles for offences under s.132(1)(c),(f),(h) CGST Act, noting limited statutory maximum sentence, documentary nature of evidence, absence of criminal antecedents, custody since 04.06.2025, and negligible risk of tampering or witness influence. No extraordinary circumstances justified continued detention. Bail was allowed subject to compliance with the conditions imposed by the HC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.