Jurisdictional validity: notice issued by a non jurisdictional officer invalidates reassessment where no formal transfer or independent verification o...
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.