Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The Punjab and Haryana High Court considered a petition seeking anticipatory bail in a money laundering case involving scheduled offences. The court analyzed the applicability of Section 45 of the PMLA in anticipatory bail and the legality of the ECIR. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the court emphasized that bail in economic offences must be granted sparingly due to their impact on society. It noted that the prosecution need not prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt for bail, but must establish a genuine case based on reasonable material. The court found that the petitioner did not meet the criteria for anticipatory bail under Section 45 of the PMLA and dismissed the petition. Additionally, the court validated the legality of the ECIR based on the registration of FIRs and highlighted that a person can be tried under the PMLA even if not directly accused in the predicate offence.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court considered a petition seeking anticipatory bail in a money laundering case involving scheduled offences. The court analyzed the applicability of Section 45 of the PMLA in anticipatory bail and the legality of the ECIR. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the court emphasized that bail in economic offences must be granted sparingly due to their impact on society. It noted that the prosecution need not prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt for bail, but must establish a genuine case based on reasonable material. The court found that the petitioner did not meet the criteria for anticipatory bail under Section 45 of the PMLA and dismissed the petition. Additionally, the court validated the legality of the ECIR based on the registration of FIRs and highlighted that a person can be tried under the PMLA even if not directly accused in the predicate offence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
