Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The provisional attachment order treating the appellant's land property as 'proceeds of crime' was challenged on the ground of time limitation of 180 days. It was held that even if the appellant is not an accused but holds the 'proceeds of crime', and even if the property is not directly or indirectly obtained from the crime but is of the value thereof, it would fall under the definition of 'proceeds of crime' and can be subjected to seizure/attachment. Regarding the provisional attachment lapsing after 180 days, reliance was placed on a Telangana High Court judgment where the period of 180 days was counted after excluding the COVID-19 period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, as notified by the Government. The main allegation involved extracting money from 51 students for arranging visas and admissions in Australia, amounting to Rs.7.56 crores, which was treated as 'proceeds of crime'. The investigation revealed the involvement of certain individuals in generating this money through a scheduled offence. The circular transaction was found to be created to project the 'proceeds of crime' as untainted. The appeal was dismissed.
The provisional attachment order treating the appellant's land property as 'proceeds of crime' was challenged on the ground of time limitation of 180 days. It was held that even if the appellant is not an accused but holds the 'proceeds of crime', and even if the property is not directly or indirectly obtained from the crime but is of the value thereof, it would fall under the definition of 'proceeds of crime' and can be subjected to seizure/attachment. Regarding the provisional attachment lapsing after 180 days, reliance was placed on a Telangana High Court judgment where the period of 180 days was counted after excluding the COVID-19 period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, as notified by the Government. The main allegation involved extracting money from 51 students for arranging visas and admissions in Australia, amounting to Rs.7.56 crores, which was treated as 'proceeds of crime'. The investigation revealed the involvement of certain individuals in generating this money through a scheduled offence. The circular transaction was found to be created to project the 'proceeds of crime' as untainted. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
