The Tribunal upheld provisional attachment of flats, parking spaces and agricultural land as equivalent-value property under PMLA, finding that the assets were purchased during the period of criminal activity after receipt of funds treated as proceeds of crime. The appellants' claim that the properties were acquired before the scheduled offence was rejected because the record showed otherwise and no legitimate source of acquisition was proved. It also held that the date of registration of the criminal case was not decisive, and declined to apply Seema Garg in light of later Supreme Court and High Court interpretation that proceeds of crime can cover property of equivalent value. The confirmation of attachment was sustained and both appeals were dismissed.
The Tribunal upheld provisional attachment of flats, parking spaces and agricultural land as equivalent-value property under PMLA, finding that the assets were purchased during the period of criminal activity after receipt of funds treated as proceeds of crime. The appellants' claim that the properties were acquired before the scheduled offence was rejected because the record showed otherwise and no legitimate source of acquisition was proved. It also held that the date of registration of the criminal case was not decisive, and declined to apply Seema Garg in light of later Supreme Court and High Court interpretation that proceeds of crime can cover property of equivalent value. The confirmation of attachment was sustained and both appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
