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

The AT dismissed the appeal and upheld the provisional attachment order. The tribunal found the impugned order was not mechanically passed and that the appellant's contention-predicated on declined prosecution sanction against certain officials and characterization of the dispute as purely contractual-failed. Evidence did not support short supply of the contracted brand or any prior consent to substitute other branded PDW; moreover, claims for payment for the contracted brand contradicted the appellant's contractual-dispute plea. The AT concluded the facts disclosed not only breach of contract but also an intent to deceive by supplying unapproved brands without competent authority permission, thereby justifying continuation of criminal proceedings and maintenance of the attachment.