Provisional attachment of laundered funds and equivalent-value property sustained, with statutory protection limited to pension, gratuity and providen...
Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
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.