Article 32 may be invoked to quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process, and the availability of an alternative remedy does not itself bar jurisdiction. However, direct recourse is ordinarily inappropriate where remedies under Article 226 or Section 482 CrPC are available, unless fundamental-right infringement or exceptional circumstances are shown. On the same-transaction test, multiple FIRs cannot continue for one incident or connected offences forming a single transaction, but may proceed for distinct occurrences. Cyber-fraud complaints involving separate inducements, victims, transactions and consequences were treated as prima facie distinct; a common modus operandi or fund transfers alone did not justify clubbing or a composite investigation.

Technology-based recovery mechanisms cannot restrict or disable a borrower's mobile device unless the bank financed acquisition of that device. Where permitted, banks must adopt a gradual approach and preserve essential functions, including incoming calls, SMS access, and emergency SOS features. Regulated entities and service providers must obtain manufacturer or operating-system certification for device-locking technology. Disclosure of borrower or guarantor information to recovery personnel must be limited to what is necessary for loan-recovery duties.

The transition period for mandatory India Conformity Assessment Scheme (i-CAS)-Halal certification for exports of specified meat and meat products to Egypt is extended from six to nine months from 9 February 2026. The extension is intended to enable system readiness and completion of onboarding and accreditation of Egyptian halal certification bodies under i-CAS-Halal. All other requirements under the earlier notification governing these exports remain unchanged.

An inventory-based cross-border e-commerce export framework permits eligible non-marketplace e-commerce entities to conduct export-only inventory operations through a registered Exporter-on-Record (EOR), subject to the Foreign Trade Policy and Consolidated FDI Policy. The EOR may procure only Indian-origin goods from registered Sellers-on-Record against confirmed overseas export orders, with no speculative title transfer or inventory build-up. The EOR must segregate and digitally track export inventory, pay sellers within seven days of acceptance, claim and proportionately pass through export rebates and refunds after any administrative charge, and manage reverse logistics. Returned goods cannot enter the domestic market, and EORs should use notified export hubs where practicable.

The Inventory-based Cross-border E-Commerce Facilitation Framework requires Exporters-on-Record to register through ANF-9A, notify changes in registration particulars, maintain linked digital inventory records, and ensure inventory matches seller declarations. Exporters-on-Record are responsible for destination-country product compliance, seller visibility, brand disclosure, and timely transfer of seller-attributable export benefits. The framework prescribes return and disposal obligations for non-conforming goods and returned consignments, annual independent compliance certification, and five-year record retention. It also establishes DGFT-facilitated resolution of exporter-seller disputes while preserving micro and small enterprises' statutory rights. The procedures and registration form take immediate effect.

License-wise voluntary duty payment data received from Customs/ICEGATE will be integrated into the DGFT portal for paperless processing of Export Obligation Discharge Certificate applications under the Advance Authorisation and Export Promotion Capital Goods schemes. Only payment details displayed on the DGFT officer or customer portal will be recognised for EODC processing and closure. For payments made on or after 1 August 2026, authorisation holders must enter correct licence and IEC details in ICEGATE and verify portal records before filing; Regional Authorities must treat the displayed data as the official record. Missing or incorrect records may be reported through the DGFT Helpdesk with payment proof.

FDI restrictions on B2C and inventory-based e-commerce will not apply to exports of goods or products manufactured or produced in India. A proposed new FDI Policy paragraph permits e-commerce entities to operate an inventory-based e-commerce model exclusively for such exports, subject to the Foreign Trade Policy 2023, the Handbook of Procedures, and applicable foreign exchange export regulations. The existing prohibition on FDI in B2C e-commerce and inventory-based e-commerce therefore remains applicable to domestic sales, while the export-specific exemption becomes effective from the date of the FEMA notification.

Second FIRs are barred where they concern the same incident, offence, or transaction already under investigation. A subsequent FIR remains permissible if it presents a rival version, concerns a separate incident, has a distinct scope, or reveals newly discovered facts or a wider conspiracy. Where an earlier FIR alleged a specific bribe demand and acceptance, a later FIR alleging an extensive corruption conspiracy involving multiple persons, transactions, and communications over time had a materially broader and distinct scope. The subsequent FIR was therefore maintainable, the quashing order was set aside, and investigation was restored.

Attachment before judgment protects only property belonging to the defendant when the suit is instituted and cannot determine whether an earlier transfer was fraudulent. Order XXXVIII Rule 8 read with Order XXI Rule 58 CPC permits adjudication of third-party claims, while Order XXXVIII Rule 10 preserves rights acquired before attachment. A creditor challenging a pre-suit sale under Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act must prove an intent to defeat or delay creditors; suspicion, related-party dealings, financial difficulty, or partial cash payment is insufficient. A registered sale supported by antecedent dealings and valuable consideration, including adjustment of past liability, remains effective against a subsequent attachment absent cogent proof of collusion or fraudulent intent.

Section 37C of the Central Excise Act exhaustively prescribes valid modes for serving adjudicatory orders, including specified postal and courier methods and, where necessary, affixture. Email transmission is not a prescribed mode and cannot constitute actual or deemed service for calculating the appeal limitation period, particularly where speed-post delivery was unsuccessful. A subsequently supplied certified copy is relevant to service. The appellate authority must decide the appeal on merits without treating it as time-barred based on the email date.

Regular books of account supported by audited accounts, invoices, bank records and quantitative stock registers cannot be rejected merely because cash withdrawals were made despite available cash balances, without identified defects in the books or stock records. Recorded outward movement of gold bars also corroborated the sales. Cash deposits in specified bank notes were explained by recorded cash sales, reflected in gross turnover and supported by sufficient cash balance, stock records and accepted trading results. Where no material establishes bogus sales or unrecorded cash, sale proceeds already included in turnover cannot be assessed again as unexplained cash credit. The book rejection and cash-credit addition were unsustainable.

Unexplained money addition was sustained because the assessee failed to comply with remand directions requiring proof that specified concerns and their bank accounts were not used for accommodation entries, production of their real owners, and substantiation of the nature and recorded status of bank balances. No material was produced to rebut the lower authorities' findings or explain the seized cash and related amounts. The addition therefore remained sustained.

For a non-searched person covered by seized material, Section 153C applies once the jurisdictional Assessing Officer receives the material and records satisfaction. The first proviso treats that date as the relevant search date for identifying the six assessment years assessable under Section 153C. As the satisfaction note was recorded on 23.03.2018, assessment year 2016-17 fell within that statutory block. A regular assessment under Section 143(3) was therefore without jurisdiction and was quashed.

Interest on deposits compulsorily maintained as margin money for a bank guarantee required for business performance is treated as business income where the deposits have an inextricable business nexus. Interest annually accrued and credited to a fixed deposit does not constitute a fresh unexplained investment. Depreciation may remain available on passive use where the business has not been abandoned, and administrative expenditure may be deductible where incurred for the business. Reassessment is unsustainable where no addition is made on the recorded basis of escaped income and a different depreciation disallowance is made through a change of opinion without fresh approval.

Penalty for alleged unexplained cash deposits under Section 271(1)(c) was considered unjustified where the assessment order did not specify whether the charge was concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The cash-withdrawal explanation was rejected only on a probability-based view that the withdrawn funds were used for household expenditure. In these circumstances, the statutory discretion on penalty was exercised in favour of the assessee, and the penalties were deleted.

Unexplained-money additions require the Assessing Officer to test a prima facie source explanation through independent enquiry and establish that the assessee owned unexplained funds. Cash advances linked to notarised, unregistered land-sale and purchase agreements could not be treated as unexplained money where the explanation was supported by agreements, cancellation and return of an advance, and was not rebutted by evidence. Unexplained-investment additions likewise require proof that an investment was actually made; an addition based on an incorrect computation and an unsupported assumption, without evidence of property transfer or payment, cannot stand. The impugned additions were deleted.

ICDS-VII permits recognition of duty drawback as a government grant when there is reasonable assurance that attached conditions will be met and the grant will be received, while prohibiting deferral beyond actual receipt. Where export proceeds were realised within the relevant previous year, that assurance existed and drawback was taxable in that year; any later-year inclusion required exclusion to prevent double taxation. Where substantial export proceeds were not realised within the prescribed period, the export-realisation condition lacked reasonable assurance in the earlier year. Drawback actually received in the following year was therefore recognised and taxed in that later year.

Cash deposits and withdrawals in a bank account retained under a dissolved firm's PAN cannot be assessed as unexplained money or unexplained expenditure of that firm where its business, assets and liabilities were taken over by a former partner operating as a proprietorship. The transactions were recorded in the proprietor's cash book, bank book, return and auditor's certificate, while prior departmental records had accepted the dissolution and takeover. Continued use of the former firm's PAN in bank KYC did not establish that the transactions belonged to the dissolved firm; the additions were therefore deleted.

An attorney holder who executes a sale deed solely under a power of attorney does not incur taxable income from the property sale where the actual owner received the full consideration and transferred possession under the agreement to sell. Subsequent execution and registration of the deed by the attorney holder does not, by itself, establish that the attorney holder received consideration or derived income. On the stated facts, no taxable income arose to the attorney holder in either the year of the agreement or the year of registration.

Surrendered income arising from unrecorded debtors, excess cash, excess stock and investment, when recorded in the books and linked solely to medical professional activity, is treated as business income taxable at normal rates. Disclosure under income from other sources does not by itself bring the amount within unexplained-income provisions. Where no material establishes an independent undisclosed source, excess stock and related surrendered income connected with regular business or professional activity remain taxable as business income; application of Section 115BBE is therefore unwarranted.