https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368363 The Appellate Tribunal held that, where the statute does not prohibit substitution, it may regulate its own procedure and accept alternative property in place of a provisionally attached asset if the substitute is unencumbered and adequate security. It also treated the statutory conditions for urgent provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 as mandatory, and found the attachment vulnerable because the required recorded reasons were not produced and the necessity for immediate attachment was not satisfactorily shown. The interim applications were allowed, release of the attached property was directed, and the alternative land was accepted pending final decision in the appeal. en-us Tue, 25 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Oct 2018 07:28:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368363 The Appellate Tribunal held that, where the statute does not prohibit substitution, it may regulate its own procedure and accept alternative property in place of a provisionally attached asset if the substitute is unencumbered and adequate security. It also treated the statutory conditions for urgent provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 as mandatory, and found the attachment vulnerable because the required recorded reasons were not produced and the necessity for immediate attachment was not satisfactorily shown. The interim applications were allowed, release of the attached property was directed, and the alternative land was accepted pending final decision in the appeal. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 25 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368363