Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of AT determined appellants failed to substantiate legitimate income sources for property acquisitions between 1980-2013. Bank account scrutiny and investigation revealed significant cash deposits and property purchases without verifiable financial origins. Despite claims of gifts and agricultural income, no credible evidence was presented to justify asset accumulation. The tribunal found properties in names of multiple family members were acquired through undisclosed funds, rendering attachment under PMLA Section 5(1) valid. Consequently, the appellants' challenges were rejected, and all appeals were summarily dismissed, confirming the original property attachment order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
