https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366720 Proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act were not quashed in writ jurisdiction because the competent authority had acted on prima facie material and reason to believe that the property represented proceeds of crime. The court noted that the statutory scheme covers a broad definition of proceeds of crime, permits action where material exists, and does not render proceedings authority merely because the allegations are disputed. Since the petitioners had an opportunity under the Act and could participate in the enquiry and investigation, the challenge was rejected and the writ petition dismissed. en-us Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Sep 2018 08:15:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366720 Proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act were not quashed in writ jurisdiction because the competent authority had acted on prima facie material and reason to believe that the property represented proceeds of crime. The court noted that the statutory scheme covers a broad definition of proceeds of crime, permits action where material exists, and does not render proceedings authority merely because the allegations are disputed. Since the petitioners had an opportunity under the Act and could participate in the enquiry and investigation, the challenge was rejected and the writ petition dismissed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366720