Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Where immovable property was transferred under a registered agreement to sell cum irrevocable power of attorney, with full consideration received and possession already handed over, the Tribunal treated the sale proceeds as linked to that land and not as a separate basis for retaining equivalent-value attachment of other assets. It held that the Enforcement Directorate could proceed against the land itself after due process and notice to the buyer, and that the attached movable property was to be released if the appellants furnished an undertaking disclaiming any claim over the land; otherwise, the attachment would continue. The separate provisional attachment of seized cash was unsustained because no independent justification was shown.
Where immovable property was transferred under a registered agreement to sell cum irrevocable power of attorney, with full consideration received and possession already handed over, the Tribunal treated the sale proceeds as linked to that land and not as a separate basis for retaining equivalent-value attachment of other assets. It held that the Enforcement Directorate could proceed against the land itself after due process and notice to the buyer, and that the attached movable property was to be released if the appellants furnished an undertaking disclaiming any claim over the land; otherwise, the attachment would continue. The separate provisional attachment of seized cash was unsustained because no independent justification was shown.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
