Latest news with #GST-related
India Gazette
5 days ago
- Politics
- India Gazette
Court staff in bribery case withdraws pleas before Delhi HC, investigation to continue
New Delhi [India], June 11 (ANI): Mukesh Kumar, an ahlmad (record keeper) at Rouse Avenue Court, who is facing allegations of demanding bribes in exchange for granting bail, has withdrawn both his anticipatory bail petition and a plea seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him. The case, initiated by the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB), continues to unfold amid serious allegations of power misuse and retaliation. During the hearing on Wednesday, Justice Tejas Karia of the Delhi High Court stated that the application had been dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty granted to the petitioner to file a fresh one. The Court also directed the investigating agency to proceed in accordance with law. Kumar's legal counsel had urged the Court to instruct the ACB to comply with the procedural safeguards outlined in Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), including allowing the presence of a legal representative during questioning. Previously, the High Court had directed the ACB to submit a status report on the ongoing investigation. The Court had also refused interim protection from arrest to Kumar, stating, 'The allegations are extremely serious. There is concrete evidence on record. This involves a member of our own staff, which makes the matter even more grave.' One of the most contentious elements of the case emerged when the Court was presented with an audio recording purportedly capturing a senior ACB official discussing plans to frame a judge in retaliation for judicial orders critical of the agency. This revelation has intensified concerns about abuse of power within the ACB. Allegedly, the FIR against Kumar was lodged in response to adverse rulings by the Special Judge against ACB officials. The FIR, filed on May 16, 2025, was registered under sections related to corruption. Notably, the High Court had, just days earlier, ordered the transfer of the Special Judge from Rouse Avenue Court over separate allegations involving bribes for bail in a 2023 GST-related case. Senior advocate Mohit Mathur, representing Kumar, argued that the FIR was lodged the same day the Special Judge (PC Act) issued a show-cause notice to the Joint Commissioner of ACB regarding possible contempt proceedings. Kumar, who worked in the judge's court, contends that the timing of the FIR suggests it was retaliatory. At a prior hearing on May 20 before Justice Amit Mahajan, the State informed the Court that materials justifying the FIR had been submitted to the Principal Secretary (Law) in January and subsequently sent to the High Court's Administrative Committee. Kumar has requested that the case be transferred from the ACB to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to ensure a fair and impartial probe. He has also asked that all allegations against him be consolidated and investigated by a single CBI officer, as per Supreme Court guidelines. Further, Kumar has urged the Court to initiate a departmental inquiry against ACB officials Joint Commissioner and ACP for alleged misconduct, including corruption, intimidation, forgery, and destruction of evidence. He has also sought protection under Section 11(2) of the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011, alleging victimization by the ACB. His anticipatory bail plea before the trial court was earlier dismissed on May 22 by Special Judge Deepali Sharma, who, however, directed that the ACB must serve prior notice under Section 41A CrPC (Section 35 of BNSS) before making any arrest. (ANI)
India Gazette
27-05-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
Delhi HC seeks status report in bribery case against court staff
New Delhi [India], May 27 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Tuesday directed the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) to submit a status report regarding its ongoing investigation into bribery allegations against an ahlmad (record keeper) of the Rouse Avenue Court. During the hearing, Justice Amit Sharma declined to grant interim protection from arrest to the accused, Kumar, whose anticipatory bail plea was listed before the High Court. 'The allegations are extremely serious. There is concrete evidence on record. This involves a member of our own staff, which makes the matter even more grave,' the High Court observed when Kumar's counsel sought protection from arrest. The plea has been scheduled for hearing on May 29, the same date as Kumar's petition seeking quashing of the FIR. 'We will dispose of it,' remarked the judge while refusing to issue an interim relief order. Meanwhile, an audio recording submitted to the HC allegedly reveals a senior ACB official discussing attempts to frame a judge in response to judicial orders that were critical of the agency's conduct. These revelations have intensified concerns regarding alleged misuse of power within the ACB. It has been alleged that the FIR against the court staff handling cases related to the Special Judge was filed in retaliation for unfavourable rulings against ACB officials. Amidst the controversy, the Delhi High Court has recently ordered the transfer of a Special Judge from Rouse Avenue Court over allegations of demanding bribes in exchange for granting bail to accused individuals in a GST-related case registered in 2023. The FIR against the court staff (record keeper) was filed on May 16, 2025, under provisions related to corruption. The High Court issued the transfer order for the concerned Special Judge on May 20. Following this, the accused court staff sought quashing of the FIR, but the High Court did not grant immediate relief, though it did issue a notice to the State. During proceedings before Justice Amit Mahajan on May 20, the additional counsel for the State informed the Court that relevant material had been sent to the Principal Secretary of Law, Government of NCT Delhi, in January 2025. This information was later submitted to the Administrative Committee of the High Court via the Registrar General. The State argued that sufficient material exists to justify the allegations in the FIR, necessitating further investigation. Senior advocate Mohit Mathur, representing the petitioner, contended that the FIR was registered following an order on May 16, 2025, by the Special Judge (PC Act) (ACB)-02 at Rouse Avenue Courts. That order had issued a show-cause notice to the Joint Commissioner of the ACB, questioning why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him. The petitioner, who was posted as an ahlmad (record keeper) in the concerned court, maintains that the FIR against him was registered on the same day. The High Court has scheduled the matter for hearing on May 29. The petitioner has requested the High Court to transfer the case from the ACB to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for a fair and impartial probe. Additionally, he has sought the clubbing of allegations against him so that they may be investigated by the same CBI officer, in accordance with Supreme Court directives. The petitioner has further urged the Court to order a departmental inquiry against two ACB officials--Joint Commissioner Madhur Verma and ACP Jarnail Singh--over allegations of corruption, blackmail, intimidation, misuse of office, forgery, document fabrication, witness intimidation, and destruction of official records. Additionally, he has sought protection from victimization by ACB officers under Section 11(2) of the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011. Meanwhile, the accused court staff sought anticipatory bail from the trial court, but the plea was dismissed on May 22 by Special Judge Deepali Sharma. However, the Court directed the ACB to issue prior notice under Section 41A CrPC (Section 35 of BNSS) in case of an arrest. (ANI)
Hindustan Times
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Delhi HC transfers judge amid allegations of demanding bribe for giving bail
The Delhi High Court has transferred a special judge of Rouse Avenue court amid allegations of demanding a bribe for granting bail to the accused in a GST-related case registered in 2023. On May 16, 2025, an FIR was registered against his court staff (Record Keeper) under sections related to corruption in this regard. The High Court issued the transfer order of the special judge in question from Rouse Avenue Court on May 20. Court staff approached the High Court to quash the FIR. The High Court has not granted him any immediate relief. However, a notice has been issued to the State. During a hearing before Justice Amit Mahajan on May 20, additional counsel for the State submitted that the relevant material had already been sent to the Principal Secretary of Law, Government, NCT of Delhi, in January 2025, was submitted before the Administrative Committee of this Court through the Registrar General. It was further submitted that sufficient material is on record to justify the allegations made in the FIR, which requires investigation. Senior Counsels Mohit Mathur, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the present FIR has been registered after an order dated May 16, 2025 passed by the Special Judge,(PC Act), Rouse Avenue Courts, whereby the show cause was issued against the Joint Commissioner Anti-Corruption Branch as to why reference for contempt of Court not to be made to the High Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner was posted as an Ahlmad (record keeper) with the said Court and that the present FIR was registered on May 16, 2025. The high court listed the matter for a hearing on May 29. Petitioner court staff has prayed to the High court to transfer the case from the Anti-Corruption Bureau to the Central Court Bureau of Investigation for fair and proper investigation and or it may be directed that the present allegations against the petitioner may be clubbed and investigated by the same investigating officer of the CBI as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court. He has also sought a direction for a departmental enquiry against two officers of the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB), Government of NCT of Delhi for alleged underhand dealings, corruption, blackmailing, criminal intimidation, abuse of office, misuse of state machinery, forgery, and fabrication of documents, abduction intimidation of witnesses, and destruction of official record. He has sought protection from victimisation by officers of the Anti-Corruption Branch in accordance with Section 11(2) of the Whistleblowers Protection Act, 2011. Meanwhile, the accused court staff moved the trial court for anticipatory bail, which was dismissed on May 22. Special Judge Deepali Sharma dismissed the accused's anticipatory bail application. However, the court has directed the ACB to give a prior notice under section 41, 41 A CrPc (Section 35 of BNSS ) in the event of arrest, if any.
Time of India
23-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Scammer tries to fool Paytm CEO Vijay Shekhar Sharma by pretending to be... Paytm CEO? Here's how you can avoid such scams
In a plot twist straight out of a cyber-thriller, Paytm founder Vijay Shekhar Sharma recently found himself on the receiving end of a WhatsApp scam, by none other than a fraudster impersonating him. Yes, you read that right: a scammer posing as the CEO of one of India's leading fintech companies tried to trick the man himself. Sharma took to X (formerly Twitter) to share screenshots of the conversation, where the impersonator introduced himself as "Vijay Shekhar Sharma" and inquired if the real Sharma was in the office. The audacity of the scammer attempting to deceive the very person they were impersonating left netizens both amused and astounded. Impersonating myself to me 🥸 How did the scammer try to scam Paytm CEO Vijay Shekhar Sharma by being himself? In the messages, the fraudster requested that Sharma "check and report back" on the company's available funds and demanded the contact details of Paytm's finance head. They also asked him to forward an executable (.exe) file, disguised as a GST-related document, to the concerned person. Despite the potentially serious nature of the scam, no harm was caused. Sharma appeared to take the incident in stride, choosing instead to spotlight it with a dose of humour. By doing so, he not only drew attention to the pervasiveness of such frauds but also emphasised that even CEOs are not immune to digital trickery involving fake profiles, malicious links, and social engineering. This incident coincided with the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) launching the Financial Fraud Risk Indicator (FRI), a tool designed to enable advanced intelligence sharing among banks, UPI service providers, and financial institutions to counter financial fraud. VSS to VSS… How to protect yourself from scammers: Verify independently: Always confirm requests for money or sensitive information through a different channel, even if they seem to come from known contacts. Be wary of urgency: Scammers often create a false sense of urgency. Take a moment to think critically about any urgent requests. Check profile pictures and status: Scammers may use stolen profile pictures. Check if the status and other details match what you know about the person. Never share OTPs: Legitimate organizations will never ask for your OTP (One Time Password) over WhatsApp or any other means. Use two-factor authentication: Enable WhatsApp's two-step verification feature to add an extra layer of security to your account. While this incident highlights the increasing sophistication of cyber fraud, it also serves as a reminder that vigilance and awareness are key to protecting oneself from such scams.
Hans India
26-04-2025
- Business
- Hans India
Govt simplifies GST appeal process
New Delhi: The government has notified the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, which provide for mandatory e-filing of applications and conducting hearings in a hybrid rules also provide that any urgent matter filed by an applicant before 12:00 noon shall be listed before the Appellate Tribunal on the following working day, if the application is complete in all respects. In exceptional cases, the application may be received after 12:00 noon but before 3:00 pm for listing on the following day, with the specific permission of the Appellate Tribunal or President. The benches of GSTAT, a crucial body for resolving GST-related disputes, would sit from 10:30 am to 01:30 pm and from 2:30 pm to 4:30 pm, subject to any order made by the President. The administrative offices of the Appellate Tribunal will remain open on all working days from 9:30 am to 6.00 pm, according to the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2025. In May last year, the government had appointed Justice (Retd) Sanjaya Kumar Mishra as the first President of the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT). Mishra was a former Chief Justice of the Jharkhand High Court and selected by a Search-cum-Selection Committee headed by the Chief Justice of India. The GSTAT is the Appellate Authority established under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, to hear various appeals under the said Act and the respective State/Union Territories GST Acts against the orders of the first appellate authority.
