Posts

Showing posts from May, 2024

Notification -- CBDT notified Cost Inflation Index at 363 for Financial Year 2024-25

Cost Inflation Index for Financial Year 2024-25 is  notified at 363. Notification No. 44/2024 dated 24.05.2024
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Law (SC) -- Limit imposed by ICAI for conducting number of Tax Audit is valid and is not violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution as it is a reasonable restriction on the right to practise the profession by a Chartered Accountant and is protected or justifiable under Article 19(6) of the Constitution.

Shaji Poulose v. Institute of Chartered Accountants of India [2024 INSC 451] dated 17.05.2024 Issue for consideration: "(i)         Whether the Council of the respondent-Institute, under the 1949 Act, was competent to impose, by way of Guidelines, a numerical restriction on the maximum number of tax audits that could be accepted by a Chartered Accountant, under Section 44AB of the IT Act, 1961, in a Financial Year by way of a Guideline? (ii)        Whether the restrictions imposed are unreasonable and therefore, violative of the right guaranteed to Chartered Accountants under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution? (iii)           Whether the restrictions imposed are arbitrary and illegal and therefore, impermissible under Article 14 of the Constitution? (iv)           Whether exceeding such specified number of tax audits can be deemed to be ‘profession...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case law (SC) – In the absence of communication of the grounds of arrest in writing (Under UAPA/PMLA) to the accused appellant or his counsel before passing of the order of remand vitiates the arrest and subsequent remand of the appellant u/s 19 of the PMLA and Sections 43A, 43B and 43C of the UAPA. The ‘grounds of arrest’ would be required to contain all such details in hand of the Investigating Officer which necessitated the arrest of the accused. Simultaneously, the grounds of arrest informed in writing must convey to the arrested accused all basic facts on which he was being arrested so as to provide him an opportunity of defending himself against custodial remand and to seek bail. Thus, the ‘grounds of arrest’ would invariably be personal to the accused and cannot be equated with the ‘reasons of arrest’ which are general in nature.

PRABIR PURKAYASTHA v. STATE(NCT OF DELHI) [2024 INSC 414] dated 15.05.2024   “18. We find that the provision regarding the communication of the grounds of arrest to a person arrested contained in Section 43B(1) of the UAPA is verbatim the same as that in Section 19(1) of the PMLA. The contention advanced by learned ASG that there are some variations in the overall provisions contained in Section 19 of the PMLA and Section 43A and 43B of the UAPA would not have any impact on the statutory mandate requiring the arresting officer to inform the grounds of arrest to the person arrested under Section 43B(1) of the UAPA at the earliest because as stated above, the requirement to communicate the grounds of arrest is the same in both the statutes. As a matter of fact, both the provisions find their source in the constitutional safeguard provided under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. Hence, applying the golden rules of interpretation, the provisions which lay down a very importan...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case law (SC) – No arrest/custody by the ED after cognizance of the complaint under 44(1)(b) of the PMLA is taken by the Court to the persons who was not arrested by the ED by the exercise of power u/s 19 of the PMLA during investigation because the ED and other authorities named in Section 19 cannot exercise the power of arrest of the accused shown in the complaint. Complaint u/s 44 (1)(b) of the PMLA will be governed by Sections 200 to 205 of the CrPC. The practice, if followed by some Special Courts under the PMLA of taking the accused into custody after they appear pursuant to the summons issued on the complaint, is completely illegal. Such a practice may offend the right to liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. If the ED wants custody of the accused, the ED will have to seek custody of the accused by applying to the Special Court. After hearing the accused, the Special Court must pass an order on the application by recording brief reasons.

Tarsem Lal v. Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office [2024 INSC 434] dated 16.05.2024 “20. Once cognizance is taken of the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA, the Special Court is seized of the matter. After the cognizance is taken, the ED and other authorities named in Section 19 cannot exercise the power of arrest of the accused shown in the complaint. The reason is that the accused shown in the Complaint are under the jurisdiction of the Special Court dealing with the complaint. Therefore, after cognizance of the complaint under 44(1)(b) of the PMLA is taken by the Court, the ED and other authorities named in Section 19 are powerless to arrest an accused named in the complaint. Hence, in such a case, an apprehension that the ED will arrest such an accused by exercising powers under Section 19 can never exist. 21. We are informed across the Bar by the learned counsel of the appellants that some of the Special Courts under the PMLA are following the practice o...
Post a Comment
Read more