Medical relief status protects government-contracted mobile healthcare from commercial classification, while provisional registration cancellation req...
Charitable registration cancellation requires proof that educational activities abandoned their objects; incidental receipts and retained surplus are ...
Prospective customs notification amendments cannot bar provisional release consideration for earlier imports when bills of lading predate their commen...
Personal guarantor insolvency jurisdiction follows the corporate debtor's CIRP Bench, enabling inter-territorial transfer and preventing parallel proc...
Section 47-A undervaluation threshold: fraudulent intent requirement faces reconsideration after referral to a larger Bench for authoritative resoluti...
RBI supersession powers over multi-State co-operative banks operate independently of the constitutional six-month ceiling and permit statutory extensi...
PMLA safeguards for search, seizure and retention require recorded reasons to believe, founded on material in possession, that seized property is prima facie connected with proceeds of crime and needed for adjudication. Suspicion or unsubstantiated allegations do not satisfy these requirements, and a retention order cannot be justified later through new grounds in a counter-affidavit. Persons asserting ownership of seized property must receive independent notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. Non-compliance with these statutory and natural-justice requirements rendered the retention order unsustainable; it was set aside, while the investigation could continue in accordance with law. Availability of a statutory appeal did not bar writ review of alleged jurisdictional, mandatory-procedure and natural-justice violations.
PMLA safeguards for search, seizure and retention require recorded reasons to believe, founded on material in possession, that seized property is prima facie connected with proceeds of crime and needed for adjudication. Suspicion or unsubstantiated allegations do not satisfy these requirements, and a retention order cannot be justified later through new grounds in a counter-affidavit. Persons asserting ownership of seized property must receive independent notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. Non-compliance with these statutory and natural-justice requirements rendered the retention order unsustainable; it was set aside, while the investigation could continue in accordance with law. Availability of a statutory appeal did not bar writ review of alleged jurisdictional, mandatory-procedure and natural-justice violations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4886 
