Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6361 to 6380 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A borrower account fraud classification was quashed where the bank relied on a transaction audit report already found insufficient to support undervaluation, preferential or fraudulent transactions, and also on undisclosed Joint Lenders Meeting material. Because those materials were not supplied in the show cause notice or otherwise disclosed, the petitioners had no effective opportunity to respond, and the bank could not cure the defect by later referring to an FIR that had not formed part of the original decision-making record. The Court held that the process violated audi alteram partem and that the impugned order was non-speaking, while reserving liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law and RBI directions.
A borrower account fraud classification was quashed where the bank relied on a transaction audit report already found insufficient to support undervaluation, preferential or fraudulent transactions, and also on undisclosed Joint Lenders Meeting material. Because those materials were not supplied in the show cause notice or otherwise disclosed, the petitioners had no effective opportunity to respond, and the bank could not cure the defect by later referring to an FIR that had not formed part of the original decision-making record. The Court held that the process violated audi alteram partem and that the impugned order was non-speaking, while reserving liberty to proceed afresh in accordance with law and RBI directions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.