<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (9) TMI 407 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777918</link>
    <description>Environmental compensation must bear a rational nexus to the harm caused and be fixed under the applicable regulatory methodology; a turnover-based enhancement without such nexus was unsustainable and was set aside. A tribunal confined to environmental adjudication cannot direct the Enforcement Directorate to examine action under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 without a proper statutory basis; that direction was beyond jurisdiction and was set aside. Where compliance had been reported, continuing audit, monitoring, restoration and regulatory supervision could be retained, but blanket closure directions were unnecessary and excessive and were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2025 13:37:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=848837" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 407 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777918</link>
      <description>Environmental compensation must bear a rational nexus to the harm caused and be fixed under the applicable regulatory methodology; a turnover-based enhancement without such nexus was unsustainable and was set aside. A tribunal confined to environmental adjudication cannot direct the Enforcement Directorate to examine action under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 without a proper statutory basis; that direction was beyond jurisdiction and was set aside. Where compliance had been reported, continuing audit, monitoring, restoration and regulatory supervision could be retained, but blanket closure directions were unnecessary and excessive and were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>