https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363033 The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the confirmation of the Provisional Attachment Order and set aside both the provisional attachment order and the confirmation/impugned order related to the specific property in question. It found that the property was acquired before the alleged criminal activity, emphasizing the lack of evidence connecting it to proceeds of crime as defined in the PMLA Act. The Tribunal criticized the Adjudicating Authority for not providing valid reasons or evidence to support the attachment, ultimately ruling the attachment unjustified. No costs were imposed, and the decision did not extend to other borrowers' properties. en-us Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Jul 2018 08:14:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363033 The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the confirmation of the Provisional Attachment Order and set aside both the provisional attachment order and the confirmation/impugned order related to the specific property in question. It found that the property was acquired before the alleged criminal activity, emphasizing the lack of evidence connecting it to proceeds of crime as defined in the PMLA Act. The Tribunal criticized the Adjudicating Authority for not providing valid reasons or evidence to support the attachment, ultimately ruling the attachment unjustified. No costs were imposed, and the decision did not extend to other borrowers' properties. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363033