Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The AT dismissed appeals challenging property attachment under money laundering provisions. Despite appellants not being named in the predicate offence FIR or chargesheet, the tribunal held that properties can be attached from any person possessing proceeds of crime, following Supreme Court precedent in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. The corporate appellants, though non-corporeal juristic persons, could not claim immunity as they were controlled by accused shareholders who layered criminal proceeds through these entities. The ED established reasonable belief that properties constituted proceeds of crime through evidence of foreign remittances, layering activities, and nexus with predicate offences. Appellants failed to demonstrate legitimate income sources or break the connection to criminal proceeds. The attachment was deemed lawful and properly confirmed by the adjudicating authority.
The AT dismissed appeals challenging property attachment under money laundering provisions. Despite appellants not being named in the predicate offence FIR or chargesheet, the tribunal held that properties can be attached from any person possessing proceeds of crime, following Supreme Court precedent in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. The corporate appellants, though non-corporeal juristic persons, could not claim immunity as they were controlled by accused shareholders who layered criminal proceeds through these entities. The ED established reasonable belief that properties constituted proceeds of crime through evidence of foreign remittances, layering activities, and nexus with predicate offences. Appellants failed to demonstrate legitimate income sources or break the connection to criminal proceeds. The attachment was deemed lawful and properly confirmed by the adjudicating authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
