Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96174 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.