Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
A High Court held that money-laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA is an independent offence, but prosecution still requires prima facie material showing proceeds of crime derived from a scheduled offence and the accused's involvement in a connected process or activity. Where the predicate investigation had already found that the petitioner was not a beneficiary and no independent material showed tainted funds, the PMLA case could not rest on assumption. The Court also held that a co-accused's Section 50 statement could not, by itself, found the prosecution, and that the warehouse-receipt transactions were not shown to be sham. Continuation of proceedings against the petitioner was quashed as abuse of process.
A High Court held that money-laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA is an independent offence, but prosecution still requires prima facie material showing proceeds of crime derived from a scheduled offence and the accused's involvement in a connected process or activity. Where the predicate investigation had already found that the petitioner was not a beneficiary and no independent material showed tainted funds, the PMLA case could not rest on assumption. The Court also held that a co-accused's Section 50 statement could not, by itself, found the prosecution, and that the warehouse-receipt transactions were not shown to be sham. Continuation of proceedings against the petitioner was quashed as abuse of process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.