Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AT held that the properties were rightfully attached as proceeds of crime under PMLA, despite the absence of a direct predicate offence charge. The tribunal determined that the properties were infused with proceeds from narcotics-related activities, satisfying the legal threshold for attachment. The Enforcement Directorate established sufficient probable cause that the properties were derived from scheduled offences under NDPS Act. The court affirmed that properties can be attached even if purchased before the alleged criminal incident, particularly when proceeds of crime are unavailable. The procedural requirements under Section 5(1)(b) were met, and the attachment order was deemed valid. The appeal was consequently dismissed, maintaining the attachment of the properties until criminal proceedings conclude.
The AT held that the properties were rightfully attached as proceeds of crime under PMLA, despite the absence of a direct predicate offence charge. The tribunal determined that the properties were infused with proceeds from narcotics-related activities, satisfying the legal threshold for attachment. The Enforcement Directorate established sufficient probable cause that the properties were derived from scheduled offences under NDPS Act. The court affirmed that properties can be attached even if purchased before the alleged criminal incident, particularly when proceeds of crime are unavailable. The procedural requirements under Section 5(1)(b) were met, and the attachment order was deemed valid. The appeal was consequently dismissed, maintaining the attachment of the properties until criminal proceedings conclude.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.