Mandatory textile export qualifiers distinguish flame-retardant fabrics from other listed fabrics for automated identification under the textiles ince...
Personal liberty safeguards restrict arrest after court-directed GST appearance, requiring interim release where authorities overreach pending proceed...
Alternative statutory remedy and delay bar GST writ challenges despite pending rectification, while distinct subject matter permits parallel proceedin...
Unverified Insight Portal Information Cannot Justify Reassessment Without a Verified Taxpayer-Specific Income-Escape Nexus or Demonstrated Application...
Page of 4913
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 98250 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 223(1) BNSS requires a proposed accused to be heard before cognizance of a PMLA complaint where the BNSS governs the cognizance stage. Section 44(1)(b) PMLA permits direct cognizance without committal but does not displace incorporated complaint safeguards; Sections 46 and 65 preserve criminal procedure unless inconsistent with the PMLA. Section 71 operates only upon inconsistency. Registration or listing of a complaint before BNSS commencement is administrative, not a pending inquiry under the saving clause, absent judicial application of mind. Non-compliance with the hearing requirement renders cognizance invalid and requires reconsideration from that stage; the hearing addresses prima facie cognizance, not trial merits.
Section 223(1) BNSS requires a proposed accused to be heard before cognizance of a PMLA complaint where the BNSS governs the cognizance stage. Section 44(1)(b) PMLA permits direct cognizance without committal but does not displace incorporated complaint safeguards; Sections 46 and 65 preserve criminal procedure unless inconsistent with the PMLA. Section 71 operates only upon inconsistency. Registration or listing of a complaint before BNSS commencement is administrative, not a pending inquiry under the saving clause, absent judicial application of mind. Non-compliance with the hearing requirement renders cognizance invalid and requires reconsideration from that stage; the hearing addresses prima facie cognizance, not trial merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.