Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
