Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
A single-member Bench of the PMLA Adjudicating Authority was held valid because the Chairperson may constitute one- or two-member Benches for adjudication, and such composition is directory rather than jurisdictional; the coram non judice objection failed. The limitation challenge to retention of seized material was rejected because the COVID-19 exclusion period had to be omitted and no prejudice or miscarriage of justice was shown. For confirmation of provisional attachment, the Court applied the prima facie satisfaction standard, not proof beyond reasonable doubt, and found sufficient material indicating the properties were involved in money laundering as proceeds of crime. All three writ petitions were dismissed.
A single-member Bench of the PMLA Adjudicating Authority was held valid because the Chairperson may constitute one- or two-member Benches for adjudication, and such composition is directory rather than jurisdictional; the coram non judice objection failed. The limitation challenge to retention of seized material was rejected because the COVID-19 exclusion period had to be omitted and no prejudice or miscarriage of justice was shown. For confirmation of provisional attachment, the Court applied the prima facie satisfaction standard, not proof beyond reasonable doubt, and found sufficient material indicating the properties were involved in money laundering as proceeds of crime. All three writ petitions were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.