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...
Restoration of confiscated property during trial under the second proviso to Section 8(8) of the PMLA is controlled by Rule 3A of the 2016 Rules, as amended, which permits consideration only after framing of charge under Section 4. Where charges have not been framed, an application for restoration is premature. The pendency of an appeal against the adjudication order before the statutory appellate forum also bars a course that would trench upon or render the appellate remedy infructuous. Applying these principles, the restoration order was held contrary to the statutory scheme and was set aside.
Restoration of confiscated property during trial under the second proviso to Section 8(8) of the PMLA is controlled by Rule 3A of the 2016 Rules, as amended, which permits consideration only after framing of charge under Section 4. Where charges have not been framed, an application for restoration is premature. The pendency of an appeal against the adjudication order before the statutory appellate forum also bars a course that would trench upon or render the appellate remedy infructuous. Applying these principles, the restoration order was held contrary to the statutory scheme and was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.