Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The AT partially allowed the appeal, finding procedural defects in the provisional attachment order (PAO) for a specific property. The tribunal determined that the PAO was issued after amendments to PMLA incorporating Prevention of Corruption Act provisions, thus not retrospectively invalid. However, the order was set aside due to failure to issue show cause notice (SCN) to the co-owner as mandated under Section 8(1) of PMLA. Consequently, the PAO for the specific flat at Patel Nagar was quashed, with the attachment order being declared invalid for procedural non-compliance.
The AT partially allowed the appeal, finding procedural defects in the provisional attachment order (PAO) for a specific property. The tribunal determined that the PAO was issued after amendments to PMLA incorporating Prevention of Corruption Act provisions, thus not retrospectively invalid. However, the order was set aside due to failure to issue show cause notice (SCN) to the co-owner as mandated under Section 8(1) of PMLA. Consequently, the PAO for the specific flat at Patel Nagar was quashed, with the attachment order being declared invalid for procedural non-compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.