Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
In fraud classification proceedings under RBI Master Directions, natural justice was held to require notice, disclosure of material, an opportunity to submit a written representation, and a reasoned order, but not an oral personal hearing as of right. The Court distinguished fraud classification from wilful defaulter proceedings and upheld the regulatory process as a prompt risk-mitigation mechanism. It also held that the borrower must ordinarily be furnished the forensic audit report relevant to the proposed classification, since disclosure of the report is necessary for an effective response; only portions affecting third-party rights may be withheld for recorded reasons, with an opportunity to contest non-disclosure. The appeals were partly allowed.
In fraud classification proceedings under RBI Master Directions, natural justice was held to require notice, disclosure of material, an opportunity to submit a written representation, and a reasoned order, but not an oral personal hearing as of right. The Court distinguished fraud classification from wilful defaulter proceedings and upheld the regulatory process as a prompt risk-mitigation mechanism. It also held that the borrower must ordinarily be furnished the forensic audit report relevant to the proposed classification, since disclosure of the report is necessary for an effective response; only portions affecting third-party rights may be withheld for recorded reasons, with an opportunity to contest non-disclosure. The appeals were partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.