Provisional attachment under money-laundering law requires a reasoned finding on proceeds of crime before confirmation can stand.

An order confirming provisional attachment under money-laundering law must rest on a clear, reasoned finding that the attached properties are proceeds of crime, reached after considering the material and contentions of both sides. Where the adjudicating authority fails to deal with the appellant's explanation of funds and proceeds on an uncertain or incomplete assessment, the confirmation suffers from lack of application of mind and cannot stand. The appellate tribunal therefore set aside the confirmation order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after hearing both parties.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order confirming provisional attachment was sustainable when the adjudicating authority did not conclusively determine whether the attached properties were proceeds of crime and did not deal with the appellant's contentions.

Analysis: The appellate tribunal found that the adjudicating authority was required to record a clear and final conclusion on whether the properties were involved in money laundering or represented proceeds of crime, after considering the material placed by both sides. The impugned order was found to suffer from inconsistency and lack of due application of mind, as it proceeded on an uncertain and incomplete assessment while confirming attachment. The tribunal held that the relevant contentions and the explanation of funds had to be considered and decided in accordance with law before any confirmation of attachment could stand.

Conclusion: The confirmation order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision after hearing both parties.

Final Conclusion: The attachment confirmation could not be sustained because the adjudicating authority had not rendered a proper reasoned determination on the foundational issue, and a fresh adjudication was directed.

Ratio Decidendi: An order confirming provisional attachment under the money-laundering law must be supported by a clear, reasoned determination on the existence of proceeds of crime after considering the parties' contentions; absence of such application of mind renders the order unsustainable.

---