Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The dominant issue was whether the police could direct a bank to freeze a person's account during investigation without obtaining a competent court's order under the applicable criminal procedure provisions. The court held that mere police instructions to the bank were insufficient, particularly when no order under the relevant statutory provisions was produced and the investigating agency made no subsequent communication justifying the freeze. Relying on precedent that debit-freezing is impermissible without judicial authorization, the court found the impugned freezing action illegal. Consequently, the bank was directed to defreeze the account and permit its operation, and the petition was disposed of. - HC
The dominant issue was whether the police could direct a bank to freeze a person's account during investigation without obtaining a competent court's order under the applicable criminal procedure provisions. The court held that mere police instructions to the bank were insufficient, particularly when no order under the relevant statutory provisions was produced and the investigating agency made no subsequent communication justifying the freeze. Relying on precedent that debit-freezing is impermissible without judicial authorization, the court found the impugned freezing action illegal. Consequently, the bank was directed to defreeze the account and permit its operation, and the petition was disposed of. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.