The Delhi High Court held that an adjudication order passed by an officer who never personally heard the assessee violates principles of natural justice. The Court ruled that “one who hears must decide” and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
GSTAT directed service through registered post/speed post after notices sent via portal and email failed to receive any effective response from the Department. The Tribunal held that Section 169 of the CGST Act permits cumulative modes of service to ensure proper adjudication and natural justice.
The constitutional safeguard under Article 20 prevents authorities from imposing harsher punishments than those prescribed when the offence occurred. Judicial precedents reaffirmed that penal laws operate prospectively in criminal matters.
The ROC held that attaching an incorrect balance sheet while filing Form AOC-4 amounts to non-compliance under Section 137(1). The company and its directors were penalized for defective filing of financial statements.
ROC Patna imposed penalties after a company failed to prove that Board Meetings were held as required under Section 173(1). Absence of minutes and non-filing of MGT-7 became key reasons for the adjudication action.
ROC Patna penalised a company and its managing director after physical verification revealed that the registered office was not functioning at the recorded address. The order highlights strict compliance requirements under Section 12 of the Companies Act, 2013.
The IFSCA clarified that retrocession and retention requirements apply to the entire gross reinsurance premium of IFSC Insurance Offices, including international business generated outside India. The guidance also explains compliance responsibilities of MGAs and foreign reinsurers.
The authority observed that except life insurance, other insurance segments under IFSCA regulations align with the statutory definition of general insurance business. The decision clarifies the legal position for re-insurance entities operating in IFSC jurisdictions.
ROC imposed penalties after a company incorrectly mentioned the financial year period while filing Form AOC-4 on the MCA portal. The ruling highlights the importance of accuracy in statutory electronic filings.
ROC Haryana penalized a company and its officers for filing e-Form MR-2 beyond the prescribed 90-day period after appointing a Managing Director. The order highlights strict compliance requirements under Section 196 and Rule 7(3) of the Companies Act framework.
