Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Writ jurisdiction was invoked to challenge detention/seizure proceedings on the plea that the goods were released on lesser security under s.129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, that invoices could not be doubted without any survey, and that the show cause notice having been issued in the driver's name could not prejudice the supplier. The Court held that reliance on alleged "consistency" with other writ orders is misplaced because writ relief is discretionary and fact-sensitive, and even minor factual differences justify different outcomes. As the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal and the contentions involved disputed factual issues (including service and non-response to the notice), writ interference was refused and the petition was dismissed - HC
Writ jurisdiction was invoked to challenge detention/seizure proceedings on the plea that the goods were released on lesser security under s.129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, that invoices could not be doubted without any survey, and that the show cause notice having been issued in the driver's name could not prejudice the supplier. The Court held that reliance on alleged "consistency" with other writ orders is misplaced because writ relief is discretionary and fact-sensitive, and even minor factual differences justify different outcomes. As the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal and the contentions involved disputed factual issues (including service and non-response to the notice), writ interference was refused and the petition was dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.