Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
At the discharge and charge-framing stage under the PMLA, the court reiterated that the enquiry is limited to whether the prosecution material, taken at face value, raises prima facie grave suspicion; the accused's defence and disputed explanations are not to be weighed at that stage. On the record, the court found sufficient material showing alleged bribery-linked layering, concealment and projection of proceeds as untainted property, so the refusal to discharge and framing of charge were upheld. Statements recorded under Section 50 PMLA were treated as admissible and capable of corroborating documentary evidence. The Special Court at Ranchi was also held to have territorial jurisdiction because the scheduled offence and alleged conspiracy were connected with Ranchi, and no patent illegality justified revisional interference.
At the discharge and charge-framing stage under the PMLA, the court reiterated that the enquiry is limited to whether the prosecution material, taken at face value, raises prima facie grave suspicion; the accused's defence and disputed explanations are not to be weighed at that stage. On the record, the court found sufficient material showing alleged bribery-linked layering, concealment and projection of proceeds as untainted property, so the refusal to discharge and framing of charge were upheld. Statements recorded under Section 50 PMLA were treated as admissible and capable of corroborating documentary evidence. The Special Court at Ranchi was also held to have territorial jurisdiction because the scheduled offence and alleged conspiracy were connected with Ranchi, and no patent illegality justified revisional interference.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
