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...
AT allowed the appeal and disposed it, holding that the impugned provisional attachment order expired by force of s.8(3)(a) of the PMLA, 2002 because the investigation was not completed within 365 days and no prosecution was pending before a court on the 365th day. The Tribunal concluded that an interim order of the Apex Court did not operate to suspend the time-limit for completion of investigation, because the respondent nevertheless filed the prosecution complaint during the interim period and could not show a restraint on such filing; consequently the continuation of the attachment could not be sustained and the impugned order stands terminated.
AT allowed the appeal and disposed it, holding that the impugned provisional attachment order expired by force of s.8(3)(a) of the PMLA, 2002 because the investigation was not completed within 365 days and no prosecution was pending before a court on the 365th day. The Tribunal concluded that an interim order of the Apex Court did not operate to suspend the time-limit for completion of investigation, because the respondent nevertheless filed the prosecution complaint during the interim period and could not show a restraint on such filing; consequently the continuation of the attachment could not be sustained and the impugned order stands terminated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.