Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
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.