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 appellant sought lapse of the attachment order u/s 5(1) and (3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, questioning the legality of the order issued in relation to alleged criminal conspiracy, cheating, and forgery in the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. The Adjudicating Authority issued a Provisional Attachment Order on 18.06.2021, followed by a Show Cause Notice on 04.08.2021, with the appellant filing a reply on 16.09.2021. Pleadings were completed on 23.09.2021, and the matter was listed for final hearing. While the Adjudicating Authority is required to pass an order within 180 days to prevent the attachment from lapsing u/s 26, the Appellate Tribunal considered the extraordinary situation during the Covid-19 pandemic. Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Prakash Corporates v. Dee Vee Projects Limited, which provided safeguards for termination of proceedings, including illustrative reference to provisions like the Arbitration Act, the Appellate Tribunal held that the exclusion period from 15.03.2020 to 20.08.2022 would apply. Excluding this period, the remaining period in this case was merely 26 days, less than the prescribed 180.
The appellant sought lapse of the attachment order u/s 5(1) and (3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, questioning the legality of the order issued in relation to alleged criminal conspiracy, cheating, and forgery in the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. The Adjudicating Authority issued a Provisional Attachment Order on 18.06.2021, followed by a Show Cause Notice on 04.08.2021, with the appellant filing a reply on 16.09.2021. Pleadings were completed on 23.09.2021, and the matter was listed for final hearing. While the Adjudicating Authority is required to pass an order within 180 days to prevent the attachment from lapsing u/s 26, the Appellate Tribunal considered the extraordinary situation during the Covid-19 pandemic. Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Prakash Corporates v. Dee Vee Projects Limited, which provided safeguards for termination of proceedings, including illustrative reference to provisions like the Arbitration Act, the Appellate Tribunal held that the exclusion period from 15.03.2020 to 20.08.2022 would apply. Excluding this period, the remaining period in this case was merely 26 days, less than the prescribed 180.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
