Capital Asset Conversion Requires Proven Business Stock Treatment; Paper Consideration in Spousal Flat Transfers Does Not Create Taxable Business Inco...
Human-probability test defeats political donation deduction where banking records mask accommodation-entry fund layering and evidence shows non-genuin...
Commercial property status protects capital-gains exemption when residential-house ownership limits are tested, while agricultural-land character gove...
Investigation deposits refunded after failed customs demands fall outside the statutory appellate pre-deposit interest regime and may attract compensa...
Resolution plan finality extinguishes unquantified operational-creditor claims and pending proceedings unless the approved plan expressly preserves th...
Section 223(1) BNSS requires a proposed accused to be heard before cognizance of a PMLA complaint where the BNSS governs the cognizance stage. Section 44(1)(b) PMLA permits direct cognizance without committal but does not displace incorporated complaint safeguards; Sections 46 and 65 preserve criminal procedure unless inconsistent with the PMLA. Section 71 operates only upon inconsistency. Registration or listing of a complaint before BNSS commencement is administrative, not a pending inquiry under the saving clause, absent judicial application of mind. Non-compliance with the hearing requirement renders cognizance invalid and requires reconsideration from that stage; the hearing addresses prima facie cognizance, not trial merits.
Section 223(1) BNSS requires a proposed accused to be heard before cognizance of a PMLA complaint where the BNSS governs the cognizance stage. Section 44(1)(b) PMLA permits direct cognizance without committal but does not displace incorporated complaint safeguards; Sections 46 and 65 preserve criminal procedure unless inconsistent with the PMLA. Section 71 operates only upon inconsistency. Registration or listing of a complaint before BNSS commencement is administrative, not a pending inquiry under the saving clause, absent judicial application of mind. Non-compliance with the hearing requirement renders cognizance invalid and requires reconsideration from that stage; the hearing addresses prima facie cognizance, not trial merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.