Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
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.