https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236181 The court upheld the provisional attachment orders and subsequent confirmation orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PML Act), finding that the properties could be attached if derived from criminal activities related to scheduled offenses. It confirmed the jurisdiction of authorities to attach properties acquired before the 2009 amendment, rejected retrospective application objections, and emphasized that the Act targets proceeds of crime regardless of the current owner's knowledge. The court also upheld directions preventing property registration to prevent transfer or concealment, in line with the Act's objectives. en-us Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Nov 2016 15:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236181 The court upheld the provisional attachment orders and subsequent confirmation orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PML Act), finding that the properties could be attached if derived from criminal activities related to scheduled offenses. It confirmed the jurisdiction of authorities to attach properties acquired before the 2009 amendment, rejected retrospective application objections, and emphasized that the Act targets proceeds of crime regardless of the current owner's knowledge. The court also upheld directions preventing property registration to prevent transfer or concealment, in line with the Act's objectives. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236181