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...
Section 528 BNSS confers an extraordinary inherent power to be used sparingly to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, and not as a substitute for the ordinary statutory remedy. The HC held that a composite challenge to distinct criminal orders arising at different stages could not be maintained in a single rolled-up petition, especially where the orders rejecting discharge and framing charge were separately revisable. Because the petitioner had an efficacious remedy, did not pursue it within limitation, and approached the court belatedly after trial had commenced and participation in proceedings had occurred, the inherent jurisdiction could not be invoked to bypass the revisional forum. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, and conversion into a criminal revision was refused.
Section 528 BNSS confers an extraordinary inherent power to be used sparingly to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, and not as a substitute for the ordinary statutory remedy. The HC held that a composite challenge to distinct criminal orders arising at different stages could not be maintained in a single rolled-up petition, especially where the orders rejecting discharge and framing charge were separately revisable. Because the petitioner had an efficacious remedy, did not pursue it within limitation, and approached the court belatedly after trial had commenced and participation in proceedings had occurred, the inherent jurisdiction could not be invoked to bypass the revisional forum. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable, and conversion into a criminal revision was refused.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
