The AT dismissed the appeal challenging the attachment of property as proceeds of crime under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appellants failed to provide credible documentary evidence substantiating the source of funds used for purchasing the impugned property, including unexplained cash deposits linked to repayment of bank loans. Assertions regarding loans from third parties were unsupported by verifiable proof. The Tribunal rejected the contention that attachment was impermissible due to the absence of charges against one appellant, affirming that property can be provisionally attached notwithstanding delays in trial or confirmation of attachment orders. The decision upholds the investigative findings and confirms the validity of the attachment under applicable law.
The AT dismissed the appeal challenging the attachment of property as proceeds of crime under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appellants failed to provide credible documentary evidence substantiating the source of funds used for purchasing the impugned property, including unexplained cash deposits linked to repayment of bank loans. Assertions regarding loans from third parties were unsupported by verifiable proof. The Tribunal rejected the contention that attachment was impermissible due to the absence of charges against one appellant, affirming that property can be provisionally attached notwithstanding delays in trial or confirmation of attachment orders. The decision upholds the investigative findings and confirms the validity of the attachment under applicable law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
