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...
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 
