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 AT dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment order under the PMLA, 2002, concerning proceeds of crime from gold smuggling. The appellant was implicated through his admissions under section 50(2) and identified as accused no. 10 in the ED's prosecution complaint. The Tribunal held that attachment of property need not be limited to direct accused but extends to persons who have received proceeds of crime. The appellant's contention that no FIR was registered was rejected, as the offence under section 3 of the PMLA is independent. The attachment of gold valued at approximately Rs. 2 crore was upheld, with the appellant permitted to seek separate remedies if excess gold beyond the attachment value is not released. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, affirming the legality of the provisional attachment.
The AT dismissed the appeal challenging the provisional attachment order under the PMLA, 2002, concerning proceeds of crime from gold smuggling. The appellant was implicated through his admissions under section 50(2) and identified as accused no. 10 in the ED's prosecution complaint. The Tribunal held that attachment of property need not be limited to direct accused but extends to persons who have received proceeds of crime. The appellant's contention that no FIR was registered was rejected, as the offence under section 3 of the PMLA is independent. The attachment of gold valued at approximately Rs. 2 crore was upheld, with the appellant permitted to seek separate remedies if excess gold beyond the attachment value is not released. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, affirming the legality of the provisional attachment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
