Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
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.