Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The High Court affirmed the independence of proceedings under the PMLA, clarifying that while the outcome of the scheduled offense may have some bearing on the PMLA case, the prosecution must independently prove the allegations under the PMLA. - The Court criticized the complainant for presuming that the scheduled offense automatically generated proceeds of crime, emphasizing the need for independent proof. It noted deficiencies in the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly regarding the source of the alleged proceeds of crime. - Ultimately, the High Court concluded that the appeal lacked merit and upheld the trial court's decision to dismiss the complaint. It emphasized that an acquittal should not be disturbed unless there are serious legal infirmities or factual errors, which were not present in this case.
The High Court affirmed the independence of proceedings under the PMLA, clarifying that while the outcome of the scheduled offense may have some bearing on the PMLA case, the prosecution must independently prove the allegations under the PMLA. - The Court criticized the complainant for presuming that the scheduled offense automatically generated proceeds of crime, emphasizing the need for independent proof. It noted deficiencies in the evidence presented by the prosecution, particularly regarding the source of the alleged proceeds of crime. - Ultimately, the High Court concluded that the appeal lacked merit and upheld the trial court's decision to dismiss the complaint. It emphasized that an acquittal should not be disturbed unless there are serious legal infirmities or factual errors, which were not present in this case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.