Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
The text explains that the power to freeze property under Section 17(1A) of PMLA may be exercised where investigative material (FIR/ECIR and related records) provides reasons to believe funds are proceeds of crime and the claimant fails to explain source; in such cases freezing is justified. Retention for adjudication under Section 20(4) is supportable where prima facie involvement in money laundering exists and continued retention does not cause prejudice. A pre-existing lien or bank guarantee does not, by itself, prevent seizure or freezing when investigation indicates the property is implicated.
The text explains that the power to freeze property under Section 17(1A) of PMLA may be exercised where investigative material (FIR/ECIR and related records) provides reasons to believe funds are proceeds of crime and the claimant fails to explain source; in such cases freezing is justified. Retention for adjudication under Section 20(4) is supportable where prima facie involvement in money laundering exists and continued retention does not cause prejudice. A pre-existing lien or bank guarantee does not, by itself, prevent seizure or freezing when investigation indicates the property is implicated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.