Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Effective service requirement: officers must explore alternative service modes beyond the GST portal and afford personal hearing; non-compliance voids...
Dispute concerns recovery of funds erroneously transferred to a wrong beneficiary account and the applicability of CGST/WBGST provisions. HC examined bank report, affidavit of the added respondent and Ombudsman order, found transfer resulted from payers mistake (account digits mismatched) and that the unintended recipient disavowed any commercial relationship and consented to return the funds; consequently the bank was directed to credit the amount back to the payers account within one week. The operative effect is mandatory restitution of the mistakenly transferred amount by the bank to the payer.
Dispute concerns recovery of funds erroneously transferred to a wrong beneficiary account and the applicability of CGST/WBGST provisions. HC examined bank report, affidavit of the added respondent and Ombudsman order, found transfer resulted from payers mistake (account digits mismatched) and that the unintended recipient disavowed any commercial relationship and consented to return the funds; consequently the bank was directed to credit the amount back to the payers account within one week. The operative effect is mandatory restitution of the mistakenly transferred amount by the bank to the payer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.