The FAQs clarify the implementation of the IFSCA AML/CFT/KYC Guidelines, covering customer due diligence, reporting obligations, governance requirements, and regulatory compliance for IFSC entities.
Since the material on record disclosed grave suspicion regarding acquisition and possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income and attracted the presumption under section 24 of the PMLA, the Special Court was justified in refusing discharge. Accordingly, the criminal revision petition of a former Forest Range Officer was dismissed.
Tribunal directed convening of meetings of equity shareholders and unsecured creditors of the transferor company, dispensed with other meetings as prayed, and issued consequential directions regarding notices, advertisements, quorum, reporting and filing of the second motion petition for final approval of the scheme.
A belated filing of Form 3CLA was a curable procedural defect and could not deprive an assessee of weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) where the substantive conditions for allowance of the deduction stand fulfilled.
Delhi High Court ordered removal of false reports linking judges and ministers to a London badminton event and directed takedown within 24 hours.
The Orissa High Court held that the Section 143(2) notice was issued by an authority lacking jurisdiction and set it aside. The Court left it open to the competent authority to issue a fresh notice in accordance with law.
The Mumbai ITAT held that ownership premises received under a redevelopment scheme are acquired in exchange for valuable tenancy rights and cannot be treated as having a nil cost. It directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the fair market value of the surrendered tenancy rights for recomputing capital gains.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that an unsigned GST assessment order is invalid and cannot be sustained. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication subject to deposit of 20% of the disputed tax.
The Cochin Bench held that the minimum one-acre condition must be satisfied by the land comprising the approved housing project itself. It ruled that unrelated land or structures cannot be included to claim deduction under Section 80-IB(10).
ITAT Kolkata held that appellate authority should have awaited outcome of pending condonation application before deciding exemption claim. Matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after considering competent authority’s decision.
