Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC ruled petitioner's arrest for money laundering under PMLA illegal. Court found ED failed to establish "reason to believe" standard required under Section 19(1) PMLA. No tangible evidence demonstrated petitioner's involvement in illegal sand mining operations or financial transactions with proceeds of crime. ED's investigation lacked proof of petitioner's share deposits in mining bids or direct participation in money laundering activities. While petitioner acknowledged financial dealings with AMPL, prosecution failed to establish connection to proceeds of crime or involvement in concealment, possession, or projection of untainted property. Court emphasized arrest power under PMLA requires substantive evidence of guilt, not merely investigative purposes. Petition granted, arrest declared violation of Section 19(1) PMLA safeguards.
HC ruled petitioner's arrest for money laundering under PMLA illegal. Court found ED failed to establish "reason to believe" standard required under Section 19(1) PMLA. No tangible evidence demonstrated petitioner's involvement in illegal sand mining operations or financial transactions with proceeds of crime. ED's investigation lacked proof of petitioner's share deposits in mining bids or direct participation in money laundering activities. While petitioner acknowledged financial dealings with AMPL, prosecution failed to establish connection to proceeds of crime or involvement in concealment, possession, or projection of untainted property. Court emphasized arrest power under PMLA requires substantive evidence of guilt, not merely investigative purposes. Petition granted, arrest declared violation of Section 19(1) PMLA safeguards.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.