Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6361 to 6380 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Provisional attachment under PMLA can extend to property of equivalent value where the original proceeds of crime are unavailable, even if the attached property was acquired before the alleged offence; the attachment was upheld on that basis. Pendency of a challenge to the predicate offence before the Supreme Court did not by itself invalidate the attachment, because the predicate offence had not been quashed and the interim stay did not extinguish it. The Tribunal also held that provisional attachment is not confined to a person formally named as an accused in the predicate offence, if the person is otherwise involved in the offence or is a recipient of proceeds of crime. The attachment was sustained, subject to the final outcome before the Supreme Court.
Provisional attachment under PMLA can extend to property of equivalent value where the original proceeds of crime are unavailable, even if the attached property was acquired before the alleged offence; the attachment was upheld on that basis. Pendency of a challenge to the predicate offence before the Supreme Court did not by itself invalidate the attachment, because the predicate offence had not been quashed and the interim stay did not extinguish it. The Tribunal also held that provisional attachment is not confined to a person formally named as an accused in the predicate offence, if the person is otherwise involved in the offence or is a recipient of proceeds of crime. The attachment was sustained, subject to the final outcome before the Supreme Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
