The AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the provisional...

The AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the provisional attachment order, finding that Rs. 8 crores in the appellant's possession constituted proceeds of crime arising from a Ponzi-like scheme and were not repaid to investors with requisite proof. The tribunal rejected the appellant's contention that Rs. 1.50 crores and other sums constituted refunds or legitimate investments, noting admissions under Section 50(2) of PMLA and inconsistent, self-created documentation. Payments totaling Rs. 2,12,76,710/- for doctors, equipment and utilities were not substantiated as repayments of the secured amounts. The AT also affirmed that property valuation must reflect value at execution/possession and, absent credible proof of a Rs.100 crore valuation, attachment limited to proceeds was appropriate. Appeal dismissed.