Section 80P business attribution: ITAT allows deduction on investment interest and ancillary receipts, but excludes staff-loan and other non-eligible ...
The MPID Act was held to have overriding effect in a dispute over seized funds linked to investor claims, and the Special Court was found competent to decide release of the money despite seizure under the Income-tax Act and objections based on the PMLA. The Court relied on the direct nexus between the funds and investors' claims, and on the purpose of the MPID Act as protective depositor legislation that cannot be displaced by enactments operating in a different field. It also upheld release of the money to an escrow mechanism for investor restitution, noting that the settlement contemplated that course and that the release was justified on the facts. The appeal was dismissed.
The MPID Act was held to have overriding effect in a dispute over seized funds linked to investor claims, and the Special Court was found competent to decide release of the money despite seizure under the Income-tax Act and objections based on the PMLA. The Court relied on the direct nexus between the funds and investors' claims, and on the purpose of the MPID Act as protective depositor legislation that cannot be displaced by enactments operating in a different field. It also upheld release of the money to an escrow mechanism for investor restitution, noting that the settlement contemplated that course and that the release was justified on the facts. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
