https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374468 The appeal was filed under section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the Adjudicating Authority's order. The court directed both parties to maintain the status quo while the property attachment continued, emphasizing the need for permission from the court holding the property before taking possession. The judgment highlighted the importance of upholding the rule of law and avoiding conflicts of jurisdiction in cases involving property in custodia legis. en-us Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Feb 2019 09:27:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374468 The appeal was filed under section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the Adjudicating Authority's order. The court directed both parties to maintain the status quo while the property attachment continued, emphasizing the need for permission from the court holding the property before taking possession. The judgment highlighted the importance of upholding the rule of law and avoiding conflicts of jurisdiction in cases involving property in custodia legis. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374468