Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Retention of seized property under the Prevention of Money...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitation.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Retention of seized property under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires the Adjudicating Authority to record reasons to believe, based on available material, that the property is required for adjudication and represents proceeds of crime. The text states that examination of unexplained investments and unsecured loans supported retention of records, jewellery, cash and electronic devices. It further explains that a Supreme Court stay of an order quashing an ECIR renders the quashing order ineffective while the stay operates, reviving the prior position for continuation of proceedings. For limitation, the period during which investigation was stayed by a court is excluded; on that basis, the prosecution complaint was within time.
Retention of seized property under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires the Adjudicating Authority to record reasons to believe, based on available material, that the property is required for adjudication and represents proceeds of crime. The text states that examination of unexplained investments and unsecured loans supported retention of records, jewellery, cash and electronic devices. It further explains that a Supreme Court stay of an order quashing an ECIR renders the quashing order ineffective while the stay operates, reviving the prior position for continuation of proceedings. For limitation, the period during which investigation was stayed by a court is excluded; on that basis, the prosecution complaint was within time.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.