Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
The HC dismissed a petition challenging the petitioner's detention under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The petitioner alleged procedural violations in his arrest, claiming grounds were not provided in writing as required by Section 19(1) of PMLA. The court determined that the petitioner had confined his challenge to the remand order dated 09.06.2023 without questioning the earlier remand order of 08.06.2023, thus implicitly accepting its validity. The court noted that the petitioner had signed acknowledgments of receiving arrest grounds and subsequently pursued bail on merits rather than challenging procedural defects. Finding no impropriety in the contested remand order and that procedural requirements were satisfied, the court declined to interfere.
The HC dismissed a petition challenging the petitioner's detention under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The petitioner alleged procedural violations in his arrest, claiming grounds were not provided in writing as required by Section 19(1) of PMLA. The court determined that the petitioner had confined his challenge to the remand order dated 09.06.2023 without questioning the earlier remand order of 08.06.2023, thus implicitly accepting its validity. The court noted that the petitioner had signed acknowledgments of receiving arrest grounds and subsequently pursued bail on merits rather than challenging procedural defects. Finding no impropriety in the contested remand order and that procedural requirements were satisfied, the court declined to interfere.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
