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: Whether interim protection should be granted in a writ petition challenging provisional attachment proceedings and the accompanying show cause notice under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Analysis: The petitioner sought quashing of the complaint, provisional attachment order, and show cause notice on the basis that the alleged predicate offences were not scheduled offences and that the attachment order lacked adequate reasons. The opposing side relied on the statutory scheme of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the correspondence clause in Section 2(2), and the continuing nature of money laundering, and also pointed out that only a provisional attachment and a show cause notice were in issue at this stage. The order noted that the attachment was provisional, the notice had already been issued, and that no interim protection had been granted in the connected matter arising from the same factual matrix.
Outcome: No interim order was granted. The respondents were directed to file a counter affidavit within three weeks and the petitioner was permitted one week thereafter to file a rejoinder. The matter was listed for admission and final disposal along with the connected appeal.
TaxTMI 
