Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.