Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
Provisional attachment under the second proviso to section 5(1) is upheld where the officer records specific reasons to believe non-attachment would frustrate proceedings; the commentary rejects the appellant's excessive-attachment claim, noting FIR allegations are investigatory starting points and quantum of proceeds requires separate ED inquiry. The reverse burden under section 8(1) obliges the person served to substantiate lawful sources for attached property; failure to produce documentary evidence permits treating the asset as proceeds of crime. Income tax filings declaring tainted receipts do not negate PMLA liability. The article concludes the respondent established a money trail and the attachment and proposed confiscation stand undisplaced.
Provisional attachment under the second proviso to section 5(1) is upheld where the officer records specific reasons to believe non-attachment would frustrate proceedings; the commentary rejects the appellant's excessive-attachment claim, noting FIR allegations are investigatory starting points and quantum of proceeds requires separate ED inquiry. The reverse burden under section 8(1) obliges the person served to substantiate lawful sources for attached property; failure to produce documentary evidence permits treating the asset as proceeds of crime. Income tax filings declaring tainted receipts do not negate PMLA liability. The article concludes the respondent established a money trail and the attachment and proposed confiscation stand undisplaced.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.