Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Compensation was sought for loss of seized silver and cash stolen from a police station while in State custody. The seizure was an exercise of sovereign power, but the subsequent loss was attributable to negligence of public officials, amounting to a constitutional tort infringing the claimant's right to carry on trade under Article 19(1)(g); compensation was therefore maintainable and granted. On quantification, the forum declined to adjudicate disputed purity of returned silver for lack of material, and confined relief to the undisputed shortfall between seized and returned quantities. The claimant was held entitled to return of 23.44 kg silver valued as on the date of compliance, with Rs. 7,95,000 adjusted against that value; petition allowed. - HC
Compensation was sought for loss of seized silver and cash stolen from a police station while in State custody. The seizure was an exercise of sovereign power, but the subsequent loss was attributable to negligence of public officials, amounting to a constitutional tort infringing the claimant's right to carry on trade under Article 19(1)(g); compensation was therefore maintainable and granted. On quantification, the forum declined to adjudicate disputed purity of returned silver for lack of material, and confined relief to the undisputed shortfall between seized and returned quantities. The claimant was held entitled to return of 23.44 kg silver valued as on the date of compliance, with Rs. 7,95,000 adjusted against that value; petition allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.