Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) is satisfied because the principal cause of action-the debit freezing of the petitioner's bank account-arose within the Court's territorial limits, permitting a writ petition challenging that freeze. The court applied the principle that a legal right infringed within territorial limits supports jurisdiction and distinguished prior authority where only a minor part of cause of action arose locally. The order holds that debit-freezing directed by police on January 6, 2025, lacked requisite magistrate-sanctioned seizure or attachment and is therefore quashed; the bank must restore account operation.
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) is satisfied because the principal cause of action-the debit freezing of the petitioner's bank account-arose within the Court's territorial limits, permitting a writ petition challenging that freeze. The court applied the principle that a legal right infringed within territorial limits supports jurisdiction and distinguished prior authority where only a minor part of cause of action arose locally. The order holds that debit-freezing directed by police on January 6, 2025, lacked requisite magistrate-sanctioned seizure or attachment and is therefore quashed; the bank must restore account operation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
