Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
The definition of proceeds of crime is broad enough to cover property equivalent in value to assets derived from scheduled offences, permitting attachment where original proceeds are unavailable. When an appeal under the Appellate Tribunal is pending against an order under Section 8(3) PMLA, the Special Court should not decide an application under Section 8(7) PMLA; a deemed embargo and the doctrine of merger require deferral, and the Special Court's allowance of such an application was set aside. The appellant's Section 8(8) remedy was correctly dismissed for failure to show quantifiable loss. The confiscation vesting in the Central Government is absolute, and the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was restored for merits.
The definition of proceeds of crime is broad enough to cover property equivalent in value to assets derived from scheduled offences, permitting attachment where original proceeds are unavailable. When an appeal under the Appellate Tribunal is pending against an order under Section 8(3) PMLA, the Special Court should not decide an application under Section 8(7) PMLA; a deemed embargo and the doctrine of merger require deferral, and the Special Court's allowance of such an application was set aside. The appellant's Section 8(8) remedy was correctly dismissed for failure to show quantifiable loss. The confiscation vesting in the Central Government is absolute, and the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was restored for merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
