TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the amounts received by the appellant from SPCL and the properties acquired from those amounts were proceeds of crime or legitimate business advances under the parties' agreement. (ii) Whether the provisional attachment and its confirmation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could be sustained in the absence of material showing money laundering and in light of the later income-tax findings and the consent decree.
Issue (i): Whether the amounts received by the appellant from SPCL and the properties acquired from those amounts were proceeds of crime or legitimate business advances under the parties' agreement.
Analysis: The funds were transferred through banking channels pursuant to a written arrangement for land aggregation. The record showed that SPCL was not involved in any scheduled offence, no material linked the funds to criminal activity, and the money was treated in the income-tax proceedings as business advances for purchase of land. The consent decree of the Bombay High Court also recognized the appellant's obligation to return the advances and hand over properties acquired from them. The Tribunal found no basis to treat the receipts as tainted money or proceeds of crime.
Conclusion: The amounts were not proceeds of crime and were legitimate business advances, not liable to be treated as laundered funds.
Issue (ii): Whether the provisional attachment and its confirmation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 could be sustained in the absence of material showing money laundering and in light of the later income-tax findings and the consent decree.
Analysis: Since the foundation of the attachment was the allegation that the appellant had used tainted funds, and that foundation failed, the attachment could not survive. The Tribunal also relied on the later income-tax appellate findings that the receipts were business advances, which reinforced the absence of any proceeds-of-crime nexus. In these circumstances, the statutory requirements for confirmation of attachment were not met.
Conclusion: The provisional attachment and the confirmation orders were unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
Final Conclusion: All appeals were allowed and the attachments over the subject properties were quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of material connecting the property to proceeds of crime, and where the underlying funds are established as legitimate business advances, provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act cannot be sustained.
TaxTMI 
