Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Clause 4.1 of the 2024 RBI Master Directions and Footnote 14 were held to govern eligibility and independence of an external forensic auditor, and could not be treated as merely prospective because they reflect the requirement that only auditors qualified under relevant statutes conduct such audits. Since the appointed auditor had an admitted continuing consultancy relationship with lender banks, a conflict of interest arose, undermining the bedrock requirement of forensic independence; consequently, the appointment and actions founded on that audit were found prima facie dubitable. Further, the audit report was signed by a non-CA and the firm's CA partners were not registered with ICAI, rendering the appointment untenable, and the gross delay in submission breached RBI timelines, justifying interim protection to prevent grave irreparable harm; the suit was allowed. - HC
Clause 4.1 of the 2024 RBI Master Directions and Footnote 14 were held to govern eligibility and independence of an external forensic auditor, and could not be treated as merely prospective because they reflect the requirement that only auditors qualified under relevant statutes conduct such audits. Since the appointed auditor had an admitted continuing consultancy relationship with lender banks, a conflict of interest arose, undermining the bedrock requirement of forensic independence; consequently, the appointment and actions founded on that audit were found prima facie dubitable. Further, the audit report was signed by a non-CA and the firm's CA partners were not registered with ICAI, rendering the appointment untenable, and the gross delay in submission breached RBI timelines, justifying interim protection to prevent grave irreparable harm; the suit was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
