Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.