https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373350 PMLA attachment, seizure and freezing safeguards cannot be bypassed through Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is inconsistent with the Act's specific regime when used to interdict share-sale transactions or freeze securities and sale consideration. Such action requires compliance with the PMLA's recorded-reasons requirement, statutory safeguards, time limits and recourse to the Adjudicating Authority. Pre-enactment acquisition of shares does not itself immunise property from PMLA proceedings where equivalent-value proceeds of crime held abroad are established. However, shares acquired through banking channels before the alleged criminal activity were not shown to constitute proceeds of crime. en-us Wed, 09 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Jan 2019 07:33:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373350 PMLA attachment, seizure and freezing safeguards cannot be bypassed through Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is inconsistent with the Act's specific regime when used to interdict share-sale transactions or freeze securities and sale consideration. Such action requires compliance with the PMLA's recorded-reasons requirement, statutory safeguards, time limits and recourse to the Adjudicating Authority. Pre-enactment acquisition of shares does not itself immunise property from PMLA proceedings where equivalent-value proceeds of crime held abroad are established. However, shares acquired through banking channels before the alleged criminal activity were not shown to constitute proceeds of crime. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 09 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373350