Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
541 to 560 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Territorial jurisdiction for a money-laundering offence may lie with any Special Court covering a local area where proceeds of crime are derived, obtained, concealed, possessed, acquired, used or projected as untainted property. The notes state that acquisition of alleged proceeds and attachment of related land at Gurugram made institution there competent, while concealment of proceeds attached at Delhi also created concurrent jurisdiction. Where the connected scheduled offence had been transferred to Delhi, transferring the PMLA proceeding there was considered expedient so that both matters could be tried by a Special Court having jurisdiction over the laundering offence. The proceeding was to continue at its existing stage.
Territorial jurisdiction for a money-laundering offence may lie with any Special Court covering a local area where proceeds of crime are derived, obtained, concealed, possessed, acquired, used or projected as untainted property. The notes state that acquisition of alleged proceeds and attachment of related land at Gurugram made institution there competent, while concealment of proceeds attached at Delhi also created concurrent jurisdiction. Where the connected scheduled offence had been transferred to Delhi, transferring the PMLA proceeding there was considered expedient so that both matters could be tried by a Special Court having jurisdiction over the laundering offence. The proceeding was to continue at its existing stage.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.