Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
SAFEMA - Service of primary notice - illegally acquired properties - relatives of the convict - Competent authority claims that the subject property (to be forfeited) is that of the convict and ostensibly held by the relatives of the convict (respondents herein) - in the present case, the properties in question and subject matter of notice under Section 6 are in the name of and held by the two respondents. No entitlement or right has been claimed in these properties by the heirs of the deceased convict. If the properties were in the name of the deceased detenu or convict, then different considerations may have applied. In the context of the present case as the convict had expired before the issuance of notice under Section 6 on 19th January 1994, therefore, the need and requirement to serve notice on him would not arise. - SC
SAFEMA - Service of primary notice - illegally acquired properties - relatives of the convict - Competent authority claims that the subject property (to be forfeited) is that of the convict and ostensibly held by the relatives of the convict (respondents herein) - in the present case, the properties in question and subject matter of notice under Section 6 are in the name of and held by the two respondents. No entitlement or right has been claimed in these properties by the heirs of the deceased convict. If the properties were in the name of the deceased detenu or convict, then different considerations may have applied. In the context of the present case as the convict had expired before the issuance of notice under Section 6 on 19th January 1994, therefore, the need and requirement to serve notice on him would not arise. - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.