Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: September 12 To September 18, 2022

NOMINAL INDEX Vikas Gupta Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 431 Varun Gupta Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 432 Aditya Kumar v. Union Of India Through Narcotic Control Bureau, Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 433 State of U.P. v. Mahfooz Ansari And 6 Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 434 Anil Gaur @ Sonu @ Sonu Tomar v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 435 Mohd. Aman Khan v. Union of India and others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 436 Ram Sewak v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 437 Judgments/Orders of the week PCIT Failed To Recorded Satisfaction Under His Signature Prior To Issuance Of Reassessment Notice By AO: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Vikas Gupta Versus Union Of India Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 431 The Allahabad High Court has held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) has not recorded satisfaction under his signature prior to the issuance of a reassessment notice by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Act, 1961. The division bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Chandra Kumar Rai has observed that subsequent to the issuance of the reassessment notice by the Assessing Officer, the satisfaction under section 151 was digitally signed by the Prescribed Authority. Therefore, at the point of time when the Assessing Officer issued notices, he had no jurisdiction to issue the reassessment notices. Consequently, the notices issued by the Assessing Officer under section 148 were without jurisdiction. GST Dept. Made Attachment Without Recording Opinion And Referring To Any Tangible Material: Allahabad High Court Imposes Cost Case Title: Varun Gupta Versus Union Of India Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 432 The Allahabad High Court has held that the department has neither recorded the opinion nor referred to any tangible material which necessitated him to pass the provisional attachment order to protect the interest of the government revenue. The division bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Jayant Banerji has directed the department to pay the cost of Rs. 50,000 to the petitioner/assessee. Railway Police Force Constables Not Independent Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To NDPS Act Accused Case title - Aditya Kumar v. Union Of India Through Narcotic Control Bureau, Lucknow [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42918 of 2021] Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 433 The Allahabad High Court recently granted bail to an accused under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act as it noted that the constables of the Railway Police Force, who witnessed the alleged recovery, search, and seizure, cannot be said to be independent witnesses. The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed that although the search and seizure were conducted at a Railway Station, there was no independent witness to the alleged recovery as the constables of the Railway Police Force cannot be said to be independent witnesses. Huge Time Gap Between The Point When Accused-Deceased Seen Together & Time Of Death: Allahabad HC Upholds Acquittal Of 7 Murder Accused Case title - State of U.P. v. Mahfooz Ansari And 6 Ors. [GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 316 of 2019] Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 434 The Allahabad High Court upheld the acquittal of 7 murder accused in view of the fact that there was an enormous time gap between the point of time when the accused and the deceased were last seen alive together and when the deceased was found dead. The bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Vikas Budhwar further took into account that there were material contradictions and inconsistencies in the statement of the eyewitness, there was a delay in lodging of the FIR, followed by the fact that CDR details did not match or mark the presence of accused with the deceased. Right To File Bail Plea Sans Delay & Access To Legal Aid 'Intertwined': Allahabad HC Suggests Positive Measures For Undertrial Prisoners Case title - Anil Gaur @ Sonu @ Sonu Tomar v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16961 of 2022] Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 435 Emphasizing that the rights to file a bail without delay and access to legal aid of an eligible prisoner are intertwined, the Allahabad High Court suggested some significant positive measures so as to overcome the delay in filing of bail pleas by undertrial prisoners in absence of proper legal aid. "The right of moving a bail application becomes illusory and personal liberty remains a distant dream if the right to legal aid of an entitled prisoner is not effectuated," the Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot observed as it directed the State Legal Services Authority to devise a scheme for such undertrial prisoners who are unable to filed bail pleas due to lack of proper access to legal aid. Anti-CAA Protests At AMU | Students Shouldn't Indulge In Such Activities Which Bring ...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: September 12 To September 18, 2022

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags