Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Provisional attachment under s.5(1) PMLA was challenged as invalid for want of recorded apprehension that the property was likely to be concealed, transferred, or dealt with to frustrate confiscation. It was held that "reasons to believe" may be formed on the likelihood of alienation, and the competent authority had recorded a conclusion that non-attachment would likely frustrate proceedings, satisfying s.5(1). The attachment was also assailed on valuation, contending mismatch between proceeds of crime and property value and seeking independent valuation. It was held that no statutory provision permits an independent valuation at the instance of the noticee, and the property value adopted was lower than the proceeds of crime; the challenge failed and the appeal was dismissed. - AT
Provisional attachment under s.5(1) PMLA was challenged as invalid for want of recorded apprehension that the property was likely to be concealed, transferred, or dealt with to frustrate confiscation. It was held that "reasons to believe" may be formed on the likelihood of alienation, and the competent authority had recorded a conclusion that non-attachment would likely frustrate proceedings, satisfying s.5(1). The attachment was also assailed on valuation, contending mismatch between proceeds of crime and property value and seeking independent valuation. It was held that no statutory provision permits an independent valuation at the instance of the noticee, and the property value adopted was lower than the proceeds of crime; the challenge failed and the appeal was dismissed. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.