Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
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 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
