Search Results for "Hawala Transactions"

22 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 22 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal of Hawala Operator in 2011 Mumbai Bomb Blasts Case. Prima Facie Evidence of Conspiracy and Funding Sufficient to Frame Charges Under MCOC Act and UAPA.

The appellant, Mr. Kawalnayan Wazirchand Pathreja, was accused no.3 in MCOC Special Case No.12 of 2011 arising from the 13 July 2011 Mumbai bomb blast...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Petition Seeking CBI Investigation in Cheating Cases — No Bias or Mala Fides Established Against Investigating Agency. Police Investigation Under Section 173(8) CrPC Can Continue Even After Charge-Sheet, and Victims Have Alternative Remedies Before Magistrate.

The petitioners, eight individuals, filed a criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Publication of Name on Website of Beneficiary Dealers in Hawala Transactions Case. Input Tax Credit Claim Based on Bogus Invoices from Fictitious Vendors Justifies Revenue's Action Under MVAT Act.

The petitioner, M/s Timex Art Décor Pvt. Limited, a registered dealer in plywood and decorative laminates, filed Modvat returns for 2008-09 and 2009-...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Restricts Provisional Attachment to Disputed Amount in MVAT Act Case — Section 48(5) Constitutional Challenge Rejected. Court holds that attachment under Section 35 must be proportionate, and directs respondents to limit attachment to Rs.1.81 crores.

The petitioner, M/s. Premium Paper and Board Industries Ltd., a registered dealer under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (MVAT Act) and the C...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Full Predeposit of Penalty in FEMA Case — No Undue Hardship or Prima Facie Case Established. Appellant failed to demonstrate financial hardship or strong case on merits for waiver of predeposit under Section 19(1) of FEMA, 1999.

The Appellant, Rajkumar Shivhare, was proceeded against for violation of Section 3(c) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) for allegedl...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Penalty for FEMA Violations in Bogus Export Case — Appellant Director Held Liable for Receiving Remittances Without Actual Exports Under Sections 3(b) and 3(d) of FEMA.

The case involves an appeal under Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) against an order of the Appellate Tribunal for Foreig...