Toy balloon tariff classification: functional heading prevails over residual rubber and festive article headings, supporting penalties for deliberate ...
Customs valuation using comparable contemporaneous imports can displace declared value, while missing speaking orders require pursuit before competent...
Foreign customs declarations and importer admissions established undervaluation, supporting sequential value redetermination, differential duty, and m...
Customs seizure safeguards prevent detention-based limitation avoidance and invalidate provisional release conditions for imported vehicles under an i...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 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" ?
AT affirmed the provisional attachment order in a money laundering case involving fraudulent investment schemes. The tribunal rejected appellant's challenges, finding: (1) predicate offenses were substantiated through multiple FIRs and prosecution complaints, (2) section 420 IPC was a scheduled offense since 2009, and (3) substantial evidence existed showing over 200 crores fraudulently collected from public through deceptive housing and investment plans. The court emphasized that burden of proof lies with appellant to disclose property acquisition sources, and provisional attachment was justified under statutory provisions to prevent potential property concealment or transfer. Appeal was consequently dismissed, upholding the original attachment order.
AT affirmed the provisional attachment order in a money laundering case involving fraudulent investment schemes. The tribunal rejected appellant's challenges, finding: (1) predicate offenses were substantiated through multiple FIRs and prosecution complaints, (2) section 420 IPC was a scheduled offense since 2009, and (3) substantial evidence existed showing over 200 crores fraudulently collected from public through deceptive housing and investment plans. The court emphasized that burden of proof lies with appellant to disclose property acquisition sources, and provisional attachment was justified under statutory provisions to prevent potential property concealment or transfer. Appeal was consequently dismissed, upholding the original attachment order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
