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...
Properties treated as proceeds of crime remained attachable where the appellants failed to prove acquisition from independent lawful sources or payment of consideration. The Appellate Tribunal found that the respondent had established the foundational case that the assets originally stood with M/s AGFVIL and were later transferred through intermediary, namesake transactions without supporting proof of genuine purchase. For one appellant, the record showed only a shifted name without documentary evidence of consideration; for another, alleged loans, seller payment, and bank trail were not substantiated; for the third, the later explanation of source was inconsistent with her own statement and unsupported by material. The confirmation of the provisional attachment was upheld.
Properties treated as proceeds of crime remained attachable where the appellants failed to prove acquisition from independent lawful sources or payment of consideration. The Appellate Tribunal found that the respondent had established the foundational case that the assets originally stood with M/s AGFVIL and were later transferred through intermediary, namesake transactions without supporting proof of genuine purchase. For one appellant, the record showed only a shifted name without documentary evidence of consideration; for another, alleged loans, seller payment, and bank trail were not substantiated; for the third, the later explanation of source was inconsistent with her own statement and unsupported by material. The confirmation of the provisional attachment was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
