Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
