Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
901 to 920 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Under the PBPT Act, attachment can continue only against benami property held by a benamidar or beneficial owner; property cannot be attached merely because its owner is treated as an abettor unless the property itself is found to be benami. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had been proceeded against as beneficial owner initially, but the adjudication position shifted to Smt. Shital Soni as beneficial owner and the appellant as only an abettor. As there was no specific finding that the appellant's attached properties were benami, continuation of attachment was unsustainable. The attachment was set aside to that extent, while the appellant's exposure to consequences for abetment was left unaffected.
Under the PBPT Act, attachment can continue only against benami property held by a benamidar or beneficial owner; property cannot be attached merely because its owner is treated as an abettor unless the property itself is found to be benami. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had been proceeded against as beneficial owner initially, but the adjudication position shifted to Smt. Shital Soni as beneficial owner and the appellant as only an abettor. As there was no specific finding that the appellant's attached properties were benami, continuation of attachment was unsustainable. The attachment was set aside to that extent, while the appellant's exposure to consequences for abetment was left unaffected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
