Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
The HC held that the Single Judge's directions subjecting the SFIO's investigative report to prior judicial scrutiny, and reserving to the Court the prerogative to direct prosecution, were contrary to the statutory scheme and amounted to an impermissible arrogation of powers vested in the designated authority. The HC emphasized that once an investigation under the statute is initiated, its course and consequent actions must proceed strictly as mandated by law and cannot be interdicted or re-routed by judicial orders. Finding that the impugned order dated 23.04.2024 travelled beyond the scope of the governing Act, the HC set aside that order in entirety and disposed of the appeal.
The HC held that the Single Judge's directions subjecting the SFIO's investigative report to prior judicial scrutiny, and reserving to the Court the prerogative to direct prosecution, were contrary to the statutory scheme and amounted to an impermissible arrogation of powers vested in the designated authority. The HC emphasized that once an investigation under the statute is initiated, its course and consequent actions must proceed strictly as mandated by law and cannot be interdicted or re-routed by judicial orders. Finding that the impugned order dated 23.04.2024 travelled beyond the scope of the governing Act, the HC set aside that order in entirety and disposed of the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
