https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381997 Seizure and retention of property under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act must comply with the Act's self-contained scheme, including recorded reasons to believe and mandatory statutory timelines. The Tribunal treated Sections 17, 18, 20, 21 and 8 as governing the field and held that retention cannot continue beyond the prescribed period during investigation. It also rejected reliance on the general seizure power under the Code of Criminal Procedure, stating that mere suspicion is insufficient and that the special safeguards in the Act prevail. On that basis, continued retention of the seized cash was held unsustainable and relief followed. en-us Wed, 12 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jun 2019 07:29:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381997 Seizure and retention of property under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act must comply with the Act's self-contained scheme, including recorded reasons to believe and mandatory statutory timelines. The Tribunal treated Sections 17, 18, 20, 21 and 8 as governing the field and held that retention cannot continue beyond the prescribed period during investigation. It also rejected reliance on the general seizure power under the Code of Criminal Procedure, stating that mere suspicion is insufficient and that the special safeguards in the Act prevail. On that basis, continued retention of the seized cash was held unsustainable and relief followed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 12 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381997