Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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 
