Export obligation removed by notification, customs duty demand invalidated; penalties under s.112 and s.114AA quashed due to inadmissible s.108 statem...
Customs officers must wear and use department-issued body-worn cameras when clearing passenger baggage, with daily secure transfer and 30-day retentio...
The AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the provisional attachment of 68% of the immovable property, concluding that the PMLA amendments effective 15.02.2013 applied and that enforcement action was lawfully initiated post-amendment (ECIR registered 27.10.2015; PAO issued 26.07.2018, confirmed 11.01.2019). The Tribunal found sufficient evidence that the appellant knowingly handled proceeds of crime-cash deposits, inconsistent explanations about sales and transport, and reliance on false documentation-yielding identified laundered proceeds of Rs. 11,41,800.00. Reliance on contrary interim orders and family-settlement title were rejected; proceedings under the PMLA and attachment were sustained as legally valid and proportionate.
The AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the provisional attachment of 68% of the immovable property, concluding that the PMLA amendments effective 15.02.2013 applied and that enforcement action was lawfully initiated post-amendment (ECIR registered 27.10.2015; PAO issued 26.07.2018, confirmed 11.01.2019). The Tribunal found sufficient evidence that the appellant knowingly handled proceeds of crime-cash deposits, inconsistent explanations about sales and transport, and reliance on false documentation-yielding identified laundered proceeds of Rs. 11,41,800.00. Reliance on contrary interim orders and family-settlement title were rejected; proceedings under the PMLA and attachment were sustained as legally valid and proportionate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.