Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of The HC held that the existence of an alternate statutory remedy does not render a writ petition under Article 226 non-maintainable, affirming the Court's discretion to entertain such petitions. The ED's jurisdiction to investigate under PMLA is contingent upon the presence of a predicate offence and identifiable proceeds of crime. The Court found that the ED lacked jurisdiction to attach fixed deposits as proceeds of crime since no new material linked the deposits to money laundering, and the investigation had spanned over a decade without such evidence. Further, under Section 66(2) PMLA, the ED cannot investigate offences beyond its remit without referral to the appropriate agency. Consequently, the impugned attachment order was quashed for jurisdictional error, and the petition was allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
