https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356573 A challenge to provisional attachment and confirmation orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 lies only where the applicant's own legal interest is directly affected by the attached property. The court found that the attachment operated against a company's bank account, not against any property belonging to the appellant, and he could not claim to be a person aggrieved merely because adverse observations were made in the attachment proceedings. As no property of the appellant had been attached, he had no enforceable interest or locus standi to maintain the appeal. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable, and the connected civil applications were rejected. en-us Mon, 12 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Mar 2018 07:02:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356573 A challenge to provisional attachment and confirmation orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 lies only where the applicant's own legal interest is directly affected by the attached property. The court found that the attachment operated against a company's bank account, not against any property belonging to the appellant, and he could not claim to be a person aggrieved merely because adverse observations were made in the attachment proceedings. As no property of the appellant had been attached, he had no enforceable interest or locus standi to maintain the appeal. The appeals were dismissed as not maintainable, and the connected civil applications were rejected. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 12 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356573