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...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Cross country pipeline classification and ITC entitlement: pipelines outside factory treated as immovable, ITC disallowed under Section 17 restriction...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6181 to 6200 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The text analyses provisional attachments under the PMLA,...
Proceeds of crime and property equivalent in value: failure to explain lawful source sustains attachment; lack of required notice can vitiate confirmation.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The text analyses provisional attachments under the PMLA, focusing on attachment of properties as proceeds of crime or property equivalent in value and the burden on alleged third parties to explain lawful source of funds; where explanations and documentary corroboration are absent, attachments were sustained. It identifies instances where non-service of the notice required by the second proviso to Section 8(1) vitiated confirmation of attachment and led to allowance of an appeal. It clarifies that acquittal in the predicate offence does not automatically release attached property if money laundering proceedings continue, and stresses inadequate explanations for cash purchases and third party parking arrangements.
The text analyses provisional attachments under the PMLA, focusing on attachment of properties as proceeds of crime or property equivalent in value and the burden on alleged third parties to explain lawful source of funds; where explanations and documentary corroboration are absent, attachments were sustained. It identifies instances where non-service of the notice required by the second proviso to Section 8(1) vitiated confirmation of attachment and led to allowance of an appeal. It clarifies that acquittal in the predicate offence does not automatically release attached property if money laundering proceedings continue, and stresses inadequate explanations for cash purchases and third party parking arrangements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.