Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
HC dismissed the writ petitions filed by A and others challenging the Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) issued under Section 5(1) PMLA. HC held that transfer of investigation to SFIO under Section 212(2) of the 2013 Act does not bar or interdict parallel proceedings under PMLA, as that provision is confined to offences "under this Act" and the two statutes address distinct offences and objectives. HC found that the D/AO possessed adequate, cogent material to form the requisite "reason to believe" for attachment, and that the belief was neither arbitrary nor speculative. Observing that PMLA is a self-contained code with a comprehensive appellate mechanism, HC declined to exercise writ jurisdiction and left all merits to be agitated before the Appellate Tribunal.
HC dismissed the writ petitions filed by A and others challenging the Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) issued under Section 5(1) PMLA. HC held that transfer of investigation to SFIO under Section 212(2) of the 2013 Act does not bar or interdict parallel proceedings under PMLA, as that provision is confined to offences "under this Act" and the two statutes address distinct offences and objectives. HC found that the D/AO possessed adequate, cogent material to form the requisite "reason to believe" for attachment, and that the belief was neither arbitrary nor speculative. Observing that PMLA is a self-contained code with a comprehensive appellate mechanism, HC declined to exercise writ jurisdiction and left all merits to be agitated before the Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
