Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
The AT allowed ED's appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order setting aside provisional attachment of properties in a money laundering case involving illegal IMFL manufacture. The AT held that the Joint Director was competent to issue the PAO in the Deputy Director's absence, and subsequent filing of the Original Complaint by the Deputy Director was valid. The material before the Joint Director sufficed to form reasonable belief under Section 5 of PMLA for provisional attachment. Documents gathered post-PAO but pre-OC filing could be relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority. The seven-year delay between ECIR recording and PAO issuance did not invalidate the attachment, particularly given respondents' non-cooperation. No prior opportunity was required before PAO issuance to rebut Section 24 presumption. The property attachment was confirmed and appeal allowed.
The AT allowed ED's appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order setting aside provisional attachment of properties in a money laundering case involving illegal IMFL manufacture. The AT held that the Joint Director was competent to issue the PAO in the Deputy Director's absence, and subsequent filing of the Original Complaint by the Deputy Director was valid. The material before the Joint Director sufficed to form reasonable belief under Section 5 of PMLA for provisional attachment. Documents gathered post-PAO but pre-OC filing could be relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority. The seven-year delay between ECIR recording and PAO issuance did not invalidate the attachment, particularly given respondents' non-cooperation. No prior opportunity was required before PAO issuance to rebut Section 24 presumption. The property attachment was confirmed and appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.