NewsClick duo's custody extended

Delhi Police Commissioner Addresses New Criminal Laws Implementation at Commissionerate Day Parade

Join us for the Delhi Police Commissionerate Day Parade at the New Police Lines, where officials discuss the implementation of new criminal laws. Watch as Delhi Police showcase their readiness and commitment to public safety. #DelhiPolice #CommissionerateDay #NewCriminalLaws #PublicSafety #DelhiPoliceParade #CommissionerateDay #ChhayaSharma #DelhiPoliceNews #Oneindia ~PR.274~ED.194~HT.95~

AAP Protest at BJP HQ: AAP Workers Detained, Kejriwal Slams PM Modi for ‘Operation Jhaadu’

The Swati Maliwal assault case took a dramatic turn late Saturday night when Delhi’s Tis Hazari Court placed the accused, Bibhav Kumar, in five-day police custody. Kumar, who serves as the personal assistant to Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal, was arrested, prompting Kejriwal to announce a massive Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) protest at the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) headquarters in Delhi. As the protest began, several AAP leaders were detained by the Delhi Police, and Section 144 was imposed on DDU Marg, where the BJP headquarters are located. Amidst the chaos, Kejriwal accused the ruling party of orchestrating "Operation Jhaadu," a purported mission aimed at arresting all AAP leaders. He emphasised that this operation was part of a larger strategy by the BJP to undermine and dismantle the AAP leadership. #AAPProtest #BJPHeadquarters #DelhiProtest #KejriwalVsModi #OperationJhaadu #SwatiMaliwalAssault #BibhavKumarArrest #AAPWorkersDetained #TisHazariCourt #DelhiPolice #Section144 #PoliticalTension #AAPVsBJP ~HT.99~PR.152~ED.102~

Sharjeel Imam Bail: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Sedition Case, Yet He Will Stay in Jail | Here’s Why

The Delhi High Court granted bail to activist Sharjeel Imam in a sedition and UAPA case related to inflammatory speeches at Jamia and AMU. Imam has served half of his sentence but remains jailed due to another case involving the 2020 Delhi riots. His speeches, while not directly inciting violence, were deemed to have mobilized public unrest leading to the riots. #DelhiHighCourt #SharjeelImam #UAPA #AMU #JamiaMiliaUniversity #DelhiRiots #DelhiRiots2020 #CAAProtests #AntiCAAProtests #Indianews #Oneindia #Oneindianews ~HT.99~ED.155~PR.320~

Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Tax Law on Foreign Investments

Supreme Court Rejects , Challenge to Tax Law on, Foreign Investments. On June 20, the Supreme Court upheld a tax on foreign corporate investments enacted by a Republican-controlled Congress under former President Donald Trump. On June 20, the Supreme Court upheld a tax on foreign corporate investments enacted by a Republican-controlled Congress under former President Donald Trump. NBC reports that the case had attracted scrutiny when conservative Justice Samuel Alito refused to recuse himself despite ties with one of the challenging lawyers. The case revolved around whether an individual can be forced to pay taxes on investments in foreign-owned companies regardless of if they were a source of income. The case revolved around whether an individual can be forced to pay taxes on investments in foreign-owned companies regardless of if they were a source of income. According to the 16th Amendment of the Constitution, Congress has the power to "collect taxes on incomes.". In the case, Charles and Kathleen Moore claim they were unfairly taxed on their $40,000 investment in an India-based company called KisanKraft Machine Tools. . While the company made a profit, the Moores claim that they received no dividends and that the money was reinvested in the business. As a result, the Moores did not pay taxes between 2006 and 2017 on what the U.S. government later defined as income from their investment. . Due to a provision that was part of a major tax law enacted by former President Donald Trump in 2017, the Moores paid $15,000 in additional taxes. They later sought a refund for that payment, arguing that they had been unlawfully taxed based on an increase in the value of a capital investment not qualifying as income. The couple's challenge was rejected by the Supreme Court 7-2