Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The court held that the competent authorities under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot be restrained from exercising their statutory powers, even if the predicate offence has been quashed or the victims have received back the money involved. Mere repayment of money or quashment of the FIR in the predicate offence does not absolve the offence of money laundering under the PMLA. The authorities retain the power to summon, investigate, and trace the proceeds of crime under the PMLA. Issuing a writ of mandamus to forbear the authorities from summoning any person under the PMLA would defeat the very purpose and objective of the Act. Therefore, the court dismissed the writ petition seeking to restrain the authorities from invoking the PMLA provisions against the petitioner.
The court held that the competent authorities under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot be restrained from exercising their statutory powers, even if the predicate offence has been quashed or the victims have received back the money involved. Mere repayment of money or quashment of the FIR in the predicate offence does not absolve the offence of money laundering under the PMLA. The authorities retain the power to summon, investigate, and trace the proceeds of crime under the PMLA. Issuing a writ of mandamus to forbear the authorities from summoning any person under the PMLA would defeat the very purpose and objective of the Act. Therefore, the court dismissed the writ petition seeking to restrain the authorities from invoking the PMLA provisions against the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
