Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.