Corporate Law : Explore complexities of PMLA bail conditions, their impact on accused, and constitutional concerns. A comprehensive analysis sheds...
Income Tax : Explore Income-Tax Implications of Joint Development Agreements in Property Transactions. Unveil the complexities of Section 45(5A...
Income Tax : Learn how Joint Development Agreements (JDA) affect income tax under Section 45(5A) of the Income Tax Act. Understand calculations...
Income Tax : Dive into the Principle of Mutuality, exploring its meaning, tax implications, and impact on cooperative societies. Discover case ...
Income Tax : Any Profit or gain arising from the transfer of Capital asset is taxable as a Capital Gain u/s 45 of the Income Tax act, 1961. It ...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that Section 54 exemption must be examined separately for each residential house sold. The benefit cannot be restric...
Income Tax : Bangalore ITAT held that allegations of capitation fee collections could not justify denial of exemption under Sections 11 and 12 ...
Corporate Law : An accused could not be kept in jail indefinitely in a money laundering case when the trial was unlikely to conclude within a reas...
Corporate Law : The SC held that the accused was not produced before the nearest Magistrate within 24 hours after the ED assumed custody, renderin...
Income Tax : The Mumbai ITAT held that ownership premises received under a redevelopment scheme are acquired in exchange for valuable tenancy r...
Corporate Law : Discover the implications of the government's notification on Section 64B of the Competition Act, effective from October 26, 2023....
Income Tax : It is noticed that the amount taxed under sub-section (4) of section 45 of the Act is required to be attributed to the remaining c...
Income Tax : CBDT vide Notification No. 76/2021-Income Tax | Dated: 2nd July, 2021 amends rule 8AA which relates to Method of determination of ...
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that initiation of demand of tax u/s 74 may be either section 61 (scrutiny of returns) or section 65 (audit by tax authorities) or some other fact. Mere scrutiny of return not mandatory for initiation of demand of tax u/s 74.
CESTAT Chennai held that Upgraded Beneficiated Ilmenite are synthetic Rutile and hence classifiable under CTH 2823 and not under 2614.
ITAT Delhi held that in view of provision of 47(v) of the Act the transaction of transfer of land from subsidiary to holding company is not covered u/s. 45 of the Act. Accordingly, when the transaction does not falls within ambit of section 45, then any claim of long term capital loss/profit cannot be allowed.
ITAT Amritsar held that transfer of REC (Renewable Energy Certificate) is capital in nature and not liable to tax under business income as the income is offshoot from environmental concern not from offshoot of business concern.
NCLAT Chennai held that subsequent to the approval of the Resolution Plan of the CoC and before the approval by the Adjudicating Authority, no modifications / alterations can be called for as IBC is a time bound process.
Delhi High Court granted regular bail on the reasonable grounds based on which it can be believed that the petitioner is not guilty of offence under section 3 of PMLA and also that petitioner has materially co-operated in the investigation.
In a recent case, Delhi High Court ruled that proviso to Section 45(1) of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) is an exception for women, exempting them from satisfying the twin conditions of Section 45. The court held that sub-classifying women under different categories and applying twin conditions would violate Article 14 of Constitution. The applicant, accused in a complaint case related to the Unitech Group, was granted bail after undergoing extensive investigations and custody for over 20 months.
Delhi High Court held that the power to grant bail on medical grounds under the first proviso to Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) is discretionary. Accordingly, court directed AIIMS to evaluate medical condition of the petitioner.
Delhi High Court granted interim bail on petitioner satisfying the test of proviso to section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) as petitioner is suffering from life-threatening diseases warranting immediate medical attention.
Delhi High Court held that interim protection granted as applicant is not named in ECIR and also the applicant is not implicated in any of the Scheduled Offences under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).
