Wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit: bail denied due to gravity of economic offence and nascent investigation.
Allegations assert coordinated issuance of fake invoices among about 56 firms to wrongfully claim Input Tax Credit, allegedly evading taxes amounting to Rs. 5.65 crore. Considering the scale, conspiratorial nature, and nascent stage of investigation, and recognising economic offences as particularly serious for public finances, the court refused bail to the applicant Saurabh Srivastava and dismissed the bail application.

Oppression and mismanagement: protection of initial shareholding and valuation to enable fair exit for aggrieved shareholder.
The petition alleged majority conduct that altered the petitioner's intended equity stake and diverted company funds, constituting unfair treatment of a minority shareholder. The tribunal preserved the petitioner's original shareholding at incorporation and directed a share valuation to enable a fair exit, with the company bearing the valuation fee and interim protection against further alteration of shareholding.

Bail presumption in money laundering cases requires reasonable grounds to believe accused is not guilty before release.
Money laundering bail applications balance the presumption that bail is the rule against offence gravity and statutory constraints. Courts consider nature and seriousness, evidence quality, accused's circumstances, risk of non appearance and witness tampering, and public interest. The twin condition requires prosecutorial opposition and that, if opposed, there be reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and will not reoffend; investigative stage, missing materials and absconding principal suspects materially affect this assessment.

Regulatory authority of RBI: directions in public interest can bar civil claims and restrain NBFC asset transfers.
RBI directions in public interest can prohibit an NBFC's asset alienation and bind civil claims even if the enabling provision is not cited; failure to challenge such directions constitutes waiver/acquiescence, preventing civil relief that conflicts with the direction. Constructive res judicata bars subsequent suits where the cause of action accrued earlier and was not raised, and winding-up petition commencement creates a suspect period during which transfers may be impeached as potentially fraudulent.

Arbitration appointment governs share-conversion dispute, shaping insolvency jurisdiction and conversion mechanics in related contracts.
Disputes over the conversion formula for optionally convertible redeemable preference shares following a qualified initial public offering were submitted to arbitration under agreements designating Mumbai and a three-arbitrator tribunal with a Chairperson. Parties disputed entitlement percentages and refund implications; compliance with SEBI Regulations required conversion prior to the QIPO. A related claim that unpaid redemption sums triggered corporate insolvency proceedings was assessed, and the factual record did not establish a contractual default sufficient to invoke the insolvency resolution process. Multiple arbitration agreements between the same parties permit separately constituted proceedings for international and domestic arbitration while retaining the same tribunal members.

Jurisdiction in customs seizure: police interceptions outside customs station amount to town seizure and invalidate statutory seizure.
Jurisdiction under the Customs Act depends on action by competent customs officers at the designated customs station; interceptions and initial custody by police constitute a town seizure, failing the statutory prerequisites for a valid customs seizure. The revenue bears the onus to prove goods are smuggled and that territorial and procedural jurisdictional requirements were satisfied before a seizure can be validly treated as a customs action.

Compounding of negotiable instrument offences permits settlement and release when parties compensate and consent at appellate stages.
Compounding under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act may be invoked at trial, appeal or revision where parties settle by payment and consent; courts treat the dishonour under Section 138 as a civil wrong with criminal penalties and may allow compounding, direct deposit of amounts and release from imprisonment to give effect to the compensatory mechanism.

Classification of gear components as machinery parts under tariff 8483 rather than as motor vehicle parts, based on nature and function.
Dispute on whether imported gear reduction blanks and related transmission components should be classified under tariff item 8483 as machinery parts or under tariff item 8708 as motor vehicle parts; prior rulings and interpretation of chapter notes direct classification to 8483 where the components are standalone gear or transmission parts rather than integral vehicle assemblies.

Right to be heard: foreclosure of the right to reply violates natural justice, requiring fresh adjudication with hearing.
Foreclosure of the noticee's opportunity to respond to a notice breaches the right to be heard and principles of natural justice. Where the adjudicating authority has foreclosed the reply, the matter should be returned to the original authority for fresh adjudication after the noticee is given opportunity to reply and to present factual and legal submissions, and after the authority issues notice of intent and completes adjudication with procedural fairness.

Duomatic principle upheld: unanimous member acquiescence prevents oppression or mismanagement findings in family company governance dispute.
The Duomatic Principle was applied to validate informal corporate acts where members gave unanimous or tacit assent: a director's withdrawal of resignation, the appointment of a managing director, and share transfers were held bona fide and not fraudulent. The appellant's prior knowledge and acquiescence estopped subsequent challenges, and she lacked locus to sue on behalf of trusts. Fraud remains an exception to Duomatic application; absent fraud and public prejudice, the facts did not constitute oppression or mismanagement.

Duomatic principle: unanimous member assent can validate informal corporate acts and bar oppression claims without fraud.
The Duomatic Principle validates informal corporate acts effected with unanimous or tacit member assent, permitting departure from strict statutory formalities where transactions are bona fide and free from fraud. Prior knowledge, acquiescence and estoppel by a complainant can negate claims of oppression or mismanagement arising from appointments, withdrawal of resignations, share transmissions, and conduct of meetings, preserving corporate finality and internal decision-making.

Dishonor of cheques enforcement: special courts, pre-summons mediation and a summons portal to reduce case pendency.
Dishonor of cheques under the Negotiable Instruments Act is being approached through pre-summons mediation, a National Portal for summons, and establishment of special courts in high-caseload districts; proposals include using retired judicial officers and court staff, with coordination among the Union, High Courts and State Governments to reduce pendency in proceedings arising from cheque dishonour.

Dishonor of cheques procedure: streamline service of summons and preserve magistrate discretion on trial conversion.
Dishonour of cheques proceedings require prompt service of summons and retention of summary-trial procedures; reforms include shortening dishonour-slip practices, mandatory contact disclosure, creating a nodal agency for electronic service and issuing unique dishonour identifiers. Magistrates must record reasons when converting summary trials into summons trials; summary-trial procedure applies as far as may be. Inquiry mechanisms under the Code permit affidavits and document examination to test sufficiency of grounds. High Courts should direct that service in one complaint arising from the same transaction be treated as deemed service for related complaints and encourage use of inherent powers and mediation to reduce pendency.

International commercial arbitration: sole proprietorships qualify when a party has a foreign nexus, triggering arbitration rules.
A sole proprietorship is equated with its proprietor and, when a party has a foreign nexus-foreign national status, habitual residence abroad, foreign incorporation, or foreign government involvement-the dispute qualifies as international commercial arbitration, even if that party operates through a local office; statutory procedures govern appointment of arbitrators and extraordinary discretionary relief cannot bypass those appointment mechanisms.

Summons issuance to company management must target authorised representatives, not routinely the managing director absent necessity.
Issuance of summons under section 108 should ordinarily be made to a Board authorised company representative; summonses to top management, including the managing director, are to be used sparingly only where representatives are non cooperative or there is demonstrable necessity. Administrative Circular guidance requires this sequence and places responsibility on departmental officers, including Collectors, to enforce these procedural limits.

Cognisable offence status: Copyright infringement is cognisable and non-bailable, allowing criminal proceedings to continue.
The legal classification of copyright infringement offences depends on the imprisonment bracket in the Code's schedule: offences meeting the statutory threshold qualify as cognisable, while lesser-punishment offences are non-cognisable. Applied to the relevant copyright provisions, the correct legal consequence is to treat the infringing conduct as a cognisable and non-bailable offence, allowing FIR registration and investigation to proceed under the Code's procedures.

Writ jurisdiction protects rights against arbitrary administrative action, permitting High Court supervisory challenges to commission orders.
Writ jurisdiction under Articles 32 and 226 allows enforcement of fundamental rights via writs such as Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Certiorari, Quo Warranto and Prohibition, particularly where no statutory appeal exists; challenges to National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission orders may be pursued before the High Court under its supervisory jurisdiction, with any interim relief subject to the rigours and constitutional limits of Article 227.

Abuse of revenue authority: improper recoveries and refund adjustments contrary to statutory stay and intimation safeguards.
The note addresses revenue practice of effectuating recoveries and adjusting taxpayer refunds without complying with statutory safeguards, characterising such conduct as an abuse of authority and a breach of constitutional taxation limits under Article 265. It emphasises that filing an appeal precludes an assessee from being treated as an 'assessee in default' for recovery purposes under the statutory stay framework, and that automatic adjustment of refunds against demands without prior intimation and opportunity of hearing conflicts with the statutory process for refund adjustment and recovery.

Suspension of limitation: moratorium under the insolvency code halts limitation, prioritising resolution before limitation resumes post-resolution.
Section 60(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code suspends the running of limitation for as long as a company is under the moratorium imposed by Section 14, and this suspension should be read in harmony with the Resolution Professional's duty under Section 25(2)(b). Insolvency shifts control from the company's management to the Resolution Professional and the Committee of Creditors, who focus on resolution rather than litigation, and limitation resumes when the company emerges from insolvency.

Reverse charge on ocean freight invalidated as conflicting with composite supply and double taxation principles.
Notifications 08/2017 and 10/2017 that impose tax on ocean freight in CIF contracts by treating the importer as the recipient under a Reverse Charge Mechanism were challenged as ultra vires, producing double taxation because freight is included in customs value, lacking territorial nexus, and mischaracterising the exporter/importer relationship; the Supreme Court refused to treat GST Council recommendations as binding and held that separate taxation of the freight service contravenes the statutory composite supply framework.