Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The Appellate Tribunal addressed issues related to money laundering, proceeds of crime from smuggling narcotics and running extortion rackets. The case involved double attachment of properties under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. The Tribunal held that the attachment of properties was not justified as it led to double attachment, contrary to legal principles. The respondents' attempt to justify attachment based on alleged violations of Floor Space Index (FSI) was deemed inappropriate as FSI violations were not relevant to the case. The Tribunal emphasized that for property to be confirmed as involved in money laundering, the Adjudicating Authority must record a finding to that effect. Since the property in question had already been attached in another context, the Tribunal quashed the impugned orders of attachment and allowed the appeal.
The Appellate Tribunal addressed issues related to money laundering, proceeds of crime from smuggling narcotics and running extortion rackets. The case involved double attachment of properties under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. The Tribunal held that the attachment of properties was not justified as it led to double attachment, contrary to legal principles. The respondents' attempt to justify attachment based on alleged violations of Floor Space Index (FSI) was deemed inappropriate as FSI violations were not relevant to the case. The Tribunal emphasized that for property to be confirmed as involved in money laundering, the Adjudicating Authority must record a finding to that effect. Since the property in question had already been attached in another context, the Tribunal quashed the impugned orders of attachment and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
