Post-search scrutiny assessment remains available where original assessment limitation is unexpired, permitting timely completion under regular assess...
HC ruled petitioner's arrest for money laundering under PMLA illegal. Court found ED failed to establish "reason to believe" standard required under Section 19(1) PMLA. No tangible evidence demonstrated petitioner's involvement in illegal sand mining operations or financial transactions with proceeds of crime. ED's investigation lacked proof of petitioner's share deposits in mining bids or direct participation in money laundering activities. While petitioner acknowledged financial dealings with AMPL, prosecution failed to establish connection to proceeds of crime or involvement in concealment, possession, or projection of untainted property. Court emphasized arrest power under PMLA requires substantive evidence of guilt, not merely investigative purposes. Petition granted, arrest declared violation of Section 19(1) PMLA safeguards.
HC ruled petitioner's arrest for money laundering under PMLA illegal. Court found ED failed to establish "reason to believe" standard required under Section 19(1) PMLA. No tangible evidence demonstrated petitioner's involvement in illegal sand mining operations or financial transactions with proceeds of crime. ED's investigation lacked proof of petitioner's share deposits in mining bids or direct participation in money laundering activities. While petitioner acknowledged financial dealings with AMPL, prosecution failed to establish connection to proceeds of crime or involvement in concealment, possession, or projection of untainted property. Court emphasized arrest power under PMLA requires substantive evidence of guilt, not merely investigative purposes. Petition granted, arrest declared violation of Section 19(1) PMLA safeguards.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.