Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The AT dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment of 20 immovable properties under the PML Act, concluding the appellant operated a Ponzi scheme through multiple entities, initially paying returns from new investors' funds before collapsing. The tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that incarceration precluded the risk of property dissipation, noting the appellant's ability to act via associates or power of attorney to frustrate proceedings. The attachment was upheld as an intermediate measure to preserve the properties for potential confiscation upon conviction, without affecting possession unless exceptional circumstances arise. The AT found no error in the Adjudicating Authority's confirmation of the attachment order, thereby affirming the restraint on the properties pending trial.
The AT dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment of 20 immovable properties under the PML Act, concluding the appellant operated a Ponzi scheme through multiple entities, initially paying returns from new investors' funds before collapsing. The tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that incarceration precluded the risk of property dissipation, noting the appellant's ability to act via associates or power of attorney to frustrate proceedings. The attachment was upheld as an intermediate measure to preserve the properties for potential confiscation upon conviction, without affecting possession unless exceptional circumstances arise. The AT found no error in the Adjudicating Authority's confirmation of the attachment order, thereby affirming the restraint on the properties pending trial.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
