Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96208 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 4811 
Join Channel 
