PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
AT upheld the provisional attachment order under the PMLA, holding that appellants A1-A3 were prima facie involved in the scheduled (predicate) offence and consequent money laundering. Investigations pursuant to FIRs and ECIR established that they extorted money using muscle power, procured land documents, manipulated revenue records, and sold properties, thereby generating "proceeds of crime" and projecting them as untainted. The quantification of proceeds of crime was based on these findings. AT noted that appellants failed to disclose any legitimate source of funds or produce evidence for the purchase of the attached properties. Distinguishing reliance on the SC order cited, AT found no ground to interfere with the impugned order. The appeals were dismissed.
AT upheld the provisional attachment order under the PMLA, holding that appellants A1-A3 were prima facie involved in the scheduled (predicate) offence and consequent money laundering. Investigations pursuant to FIRs and ECIR established that they extorted money using muscle power, procured land documents, manipulated revenue records, and sold properties, thereby generating "proceeds of crime" and projecting them as untainted. The quantification of proceeds of crime was based on these findings. AT noted that appellants failed to disclose any legitimate source of funds or produce evidence for the purchase of the attached properties. Distinguishing reliance on the SC order cited, AT found no ground to interfere with the impugned order. The appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.