Retroactive interim-moratorium exclusion permits protective asset disclosure and preservation measures against personal guarantors pending arbitration...
Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
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.