Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
HC held that the Appellate Tribunal under PMLA, by virtue of S.26(4), possesses wide appellate jurisdiction, including the inherent power to remand matters to the Adjudicating Authority after setting aside an order of confirmation of provisional attachment under S.8. The Tribunal's interference in the present case was based on breach of principles of natural justice, as the notice lacked communication of "reasons to believe," thereby vitiating the confirmation order but not the underlying proceedings. HC clarified that remand merely restores proceedings to the stage before confirmation and does not invalidate the provisional attachment by efflux of time. Finding no statutory bar or jurisdictional error, HC dismissed the appeals as devoid of merit.
HC held that the Appellate Tribunal under PMLA, by virtue of S.26(4), possesses wide appellate jurisdiction, including the inherent power to remand matters to the Adjudicating Authority after setting aside an order of confirmation of provisional attachment under S.8. The Tribunal's interference in the present case was based on breach of principles of natural justice, as the notice lacked communication of "reasons to believe," thereby vitiating the confirmation order but not the underlying proceedings. HC clarified that remand merely restores proceedings to the stage before confirmation and does not invalidate the provisional attachment by efflux of time. Finding no statutory bar or jurisdictional error, HC dismissed the appeals as devoid of merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4780
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
