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...
Prima facie material in the FIR and case diary showed involvement in offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the Court held that custodial interrogation was necessary to confront the applicant with incriminating evidence. The allegations were treated as part of a serious economic offence involving a deep-rooted conspiracy and public funds, which weighed against discretionary anticipatory bail. The plea of parity failed because the earlier coordinate Bench order arose in a different factual setting, and parity with co-accused who had obtained regular bail after substantial custody was not comparable to an anticipatory bail claim. Anticipatory bail was therefore rejected.
Prima facie material in the FIR and case diary showed involvement in offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the Court held that custodial interrogation was necessary to confront the applicant with incriminating evidence. The allegations were treated as part of a serious economic offence involving a deep-rooted conspiracy and public funds, which weighed against discretionary anticipatory bail. The plea of parity failed because the earlier coordinate Bench order arose in a different factual setting, and parity with co-accused who had obtained regular bail after substantial custody was not comparable to an anticipatory bail claim. Anticipatory bail was therefore rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
