Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
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...
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.