Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA requires the court taking cognizance of the scheduled offence to commit that case to the PMLA Special Court, and the court has no discretion to refuse transfer on grounds of delay or an advanced stage of trial. Relying on Supreme Court authority, the High Court held that the statutory scheme mandates a common competent Special Court for the money-laundering complaint and the connected predicate offence. On the special facts, the predicate offence court was also a designated PMLA Special Court and therefore competent to try both matters, so the PMLA complaint was directed to be transferred there, while the broader jurisdictional question was left open.
Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA requires the court taking cognizance of the scheduled offence to commit that case to the PMLA Special Court, and the court has no discretion to refuse transfer on grounds of delay or an advanced stage of trial. Relying on Supreme Court authority, the High Court held that the statutory scheme mandates a common competent Special Court for the money-laundering complaint and the connected predicate offence. On the special facts, the predicate offence court was also a designated PMLA Special Court and therefore competent to try both matters, so the PMLA complaint was directed to be transferred there, while the broader jurisdictional question was left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
