Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
The dominant issue was whether the show-cause notices alleging insider trading were without jurisdiction and violative of natural justice. Interpreting the statutory scheme for appointment/delegation of adjudicatory functions, and applying the legislative intent recognised in Vijay Karia, the court held that only an officer of the rank of CGM or above could validly initiate such action; a DGM lacked competence, making the notices ultra vires and amenable to writ interference despite the usual restraint against entertaining challenges to show-cause notices. The notices were also found vitiated by pre-determination of guilt and non-supply of relied-upon investigation material, breaching fairness and natural justice; consequently, the notices were quashed. - HC
The dominant issue was whether the show-cause notices alleging insider trading were without jurisdiction and violative of natural justice. Interpreting the statutory scheme for appointment/delegation of adjudicatory functions, and applying the legislative intent recognised in Vijay Karia, the court held that only an officer of the rank of CGM or above could validly initiate such action; a DGM lacked competence, making the notices ultra vires and amenable to writ interference despite the usual restraint against entertaining challenges to show-cause notices. The notices were also found vitiated by pre-determination of guilt and non-supply of relied-upon investigation material, breaching fairness and natural justice; consequently, the notices were quashed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.