Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The AT allowed the appeal, holding the impugned attachment and freeze unlawful for breach of natural justice due to non-supply of relied-upon documents (RUDs) with the show-cause notice; several RUDs, including investigative reports and FIRs, were integral to the reasons to believe and were not furnished. The Tribunal found that peripheral factual disputes (shareholding quantum, timing/repayment of loans, proprietary rights, and proportionality of seizure) became moot once procedural illegality was established. The respondents are directed to return seized movable assets, digital devices and records and to de-freeze the appellant's bank accounts within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Appeal allowed.
The AT allowed the appeal, holding the impugned attachment and freeze unlawful for breach of natural justice due to non-supply of relied-upon documents (RUDs) with the show-cause notice; several RUDs, including investigative reports and FIRs, were integral to the reasons to believe and were not furnished. The Tribunal found that peripheral factual disputes (shareholding quantum, timing/repayment of loans, proprietary rights, and proportionality of seizure) became moot once procedural illegality was established. The respondents are directed to return seized movable assets, digital devices and records and to de-freeze the appellant's bank accounts within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.