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...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority attaching immovable properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) due to non-compliance with Section 8(1) requirements. The Tribunal held that the "reasons to believe" recorded in writing must be conveyed to the appellant along with the notice issued by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 8(1) of the Act. However, in this case, the appellant was not provided a copy of the "reasons to believe" while issuing the notice. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to initiate de novo proceedings from the stage of submitting notice to the appellant along with the "reasons to believe" to enable the appellant to file a proper reply.
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the impugned order of the Adjudicating Authority attaching immovable properties under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) due to non-compliance with Section 8(1) requirements. The Tribunal held that the "reasons to believe" recorded in writing must be conveyed to the appellant along with the notice issued by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 8(1) of the Act. However, in this case, the appellant was not provided a copy of the "reasons to believe" while issuing the notice. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to initiate de novo proceedings from the stage of submitting notice to the appellant along with the "reasons to believe" to enable the appellant to file a proper reply.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
