Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
A habeas corpus petition challenging arrest and detention...
Habeas corpus challenge to arrest safeguards remains maintainable, but substantial compliance with reasons-to-believe requirement defeats the petition.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
A habeas corpus petition challenging arrest and detention remained maintainable despite a judicial remand order where the grievance was breach of a mandatory statutory arrest safeguard affecting personal liberty. The Court held that while a remand order is not ordinarily assailable on merits by habeas corpus, the writ can be invoked to test whether arrest complied with the statutory precondition of recording reasons to believe. On the merits, the Court found that the competent authority had recorded the reasons, authorised arrest, and supplied them in substance to the arrestee; no rule required a verbatim signed copy. The challenge to arrest and custody was therefore rejected.
A habeas corpus petition challenging arrest and detention remained maintainable despite a judicial remand order where the grievance was breach of a mandatory statutory arrest safeguard affecting personal liberty. The Court held that while a remand order is not ordinarily assailable on merits by habeas corpus, the writ can be invoked to test whether arrest complied with the statutory precondition of recording reasons to believe. On the merits, the Court found that the competent authority had recorded the reasons, authorised arrest, and supplied them in substance to the arrestee; no rule required a verbatim signed copy. The challenge to arrest and custody was therefore rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
