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...
Money Laundering - Proceeds of crime - attachment of moveable property of the appellant - The tribunal analyzed PMLA Section 5(1), determining that attachment requires proceeds of crime and a likelihood of concealment or transfer. It interpreted 'proceeds of crime' based on a Supreme Court case, concluding that the disputed amount frozen by the police qualified as such. Since there was no risk of transfer or concealment due to the frozen status, the tribunal deemed the attachment unjustified under PMLA. It interfered with the attachment order, directing that it remains invalid as long as the disputed amount is frozen by the police, with automatic reinstatement if released.
Money Laundering - Proceeds of crime - attachment of moveable property of the appellant - The tribunal analyzed PMLA Section 5(1), determining that attachment requires proceeds of crime and a likelihood of concealment or transfer. It interpreted 'proceeds of crime' based on a Supreme Court case, concluding that the disputed amount frozen by the police qualified as such. Since there was no risk of transfer or concealment due to the frozen status, the tribunal deemed the attachment unjustified under PMLA. It interfered with the attachment order, directing that it remains invalid as long as the disputed amount is frozen by the police, with automatic reinstatement if released.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.