The court ruled that objections to territorial jurisdiction must be raised in the written statement. Late objections cannot be entertained and are deemed waived.
The Court found no separate evidence linking the employee to wrongdoing beyond what was considered for the employer. It ruled that penalty cannot be sustained without independent justification.
The Court examined whether delay in completing disciplinary inquiry invalidates proceedings. It held that Rule 14(24) timelines are directory and do not automatically nullify proceedings without proof of prejudice.
The Court examined whether additions based on a seized document were valid. It held that lack of investigation and inconsistencies rendered the additions unsustainable.
The issue involved ex parte orders passed after SCNs were uploaded in a manner not effectively communicated. The Court held that such service did not ensure proper notice and denied opportunity to respond. The key takeaway is that effective communication of notices is essential for valid adjudication.
The issue involved delay in formal arrest despite recovery of contraband at the airport. The Court held that failure to produce the accused before a Magistrate within 24 hours resulted in illegal detention. The key takeaway is that procedural safeguards on arrest must be strictly followed even in NDPS cases.
Delhi High Court held that property acquired from proceeds of crime before Prevention of Money Laundering Act can be attached u/s. 5(1) since possession continued after Prevention of Money Laundering Act came into force.
The issue was whether coconut falls under the fruit category for EPF applicability. The Court held it does, emphasizing liberal interpretation to extend employee benefits.
The issue was whether GST show cause notices can cover multiple financial years in one proceeding. The Court held that Sections 73 and 74 permit consolidation using the phrase for any period, and declined interference.
The Court held that an assessment order passed in the name of an amalgamating, non-existent entity is void. It ruled that system glitches cannot cure a fundamental jurisdictional defect.
