The Commission held that allegations over AI-based alteration of a film did not establish anti-competitive conduct. In the absence of evidence linking the conduct to Sections 3 or 4, the case was closed under Section 26(2).
The issue was whether SEZ deduction could be denied for alleged late filing of Form 56F. The Tribunal held that filing within the CBDT-extended deadline was valid and CPC erred in disallowance. The ruling confirms that statutory extensions must be honoured in return processing.
The issue was whether payments received by private firms were genuine business income or tainted funds. The Tribunal held that advance payments and manipulated tendering showed diversion of NRHM money, justifying attachment.
The Supreme Court reinstated a judicial officer removed solely for granting bail without citing a statute in four cases. The Court emphasized that judicial errors alone cannot justify disciplinary action and awarded full back wages.
The case examined whether properties mortgaged with banks could be released from attachment. The Tribunal ruled that repayment of loans using illicit funds justified attachment to preserve assets for confiscation.
The issue was whether statements and digital records from Customs probes could support FEMA action. The Tribunal ruled they are admissible and sufficient to establish illegal foreign exchange payments.
The case examined whether penalty quantum should reflect the appellant’s role in the transaction. The Tribunal reduced the penalty after noting the dominant involvement of a third party and lack of comprehensive investigation.
Chhattisgarh High Court held that denial of benefit of exemption under Notification No. 50/2023-Customs merely because the petitioner did not adopt the LoC route is impermissible in fiscal jurisprudence. Accordingly, benefit granted as petitioner satisfied clause (i) of condition no. 6 of said notification.
NCLT Allahabad held that financial creditor duly established existence of financial debt and default thereon on the part of the Corporate Debtor i.e. Bhagwati Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. hence application filed u/s. 7 for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process admitted.
No on-money addition was made in the cases of other co-owners of the same property. The ITAT held that the Revenue cannot adopt a contradictory stand on identical facts.
