Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The HC dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment order under Section 5(1) of the PMLA, 2002, affirming the availability of statutory remedies through the prescribed appellate hierarchy. It was held that the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked to bypass the comprehensive and efficacious statutory framework, except in extraordinary circumstances. The provisional attachment order, listing specific properties as proceeds of crime, supersedes any prior notices issued under Section 54. Only officers empowered under Section 5 can effect such attachment. The appellants retain the right to contest the attachment before the Adjudicating Authority and exhaust all statutory remedies. The court noted an interim stay on proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority and directed that the 30-day period to file a reply under Section 8(1) commences anew from the date specified by the HC. The appeal was dismissed accordingly.
The HC dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment order under Section 5(1) of the PMLA, 2002, affirming the availability of statutory remedies through the prescribed appellate hierarchy. It was held that the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked to bypass the comprehensive and efficacious statutory framework, except in extraordinary circumstances. The provisional attachment order, listing specific properties as proceeds of crime, supersedes any prior notices issued under Section 54. Only officers empowered under Section 5 can effect such attachment. The appellants retain the right to contest the attachment before the Adjudicating Authority and exhaust all statutory remedies. The court noted an interim stay on proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority and directed that the 30-day period to file a reply under Section 8(1) commences anew from the date specified by the HC. The appeal was dismissed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
