https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346741 Property alleged to represent proceeds of crime may be attached under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 even if the possessor is not charged with the scheduled offence, because the civil dispute resolved by an arbitral award does not determine liability under the special statute. The Tribunal found that funds from the alleged fraud were invested in the property, but limited the traceable amount to Rs. 4.67 crores on the record and the appellant's own submissions. It therefore declined full release, modified the confirmed attachment, and ordered release of the property against security by fixed deposit receipt for that amount, leaving final confiscation to the Special Court. en-us Tue, 20 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Aug 2017 07:19:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346741 Property alleged to represent proceeds of crime may be attached under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 even if the possessor is not charged with the scheduled offence, because the civil dispute resolved by an arbitral award does not determine liability under the special statute. The Tribunal found that funds from the alleged fraud were invested in the property, but limited the traceable amount to Rs. 4.67 crores on the record and the appellant's own submissions. It therefore declined full release, modified the confirmed attachment, and ordered release of the property against security by fixed deposit receipt for that amount, leaving final confiscation to the Special Court. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 20 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346741