https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295858 The Tribunal ordered both parties to maintain status quo regarding a property subject to an attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appellant argued that "possession" in Section 8(4) of the Act should be symbolic, not physical, to protect constitutional and human rights. The Tribunal accepted the appellant's arguments, noting potential irreparable harm if the eviction notice is enforced. The appellant was directed not to dispose of the property and to deposit a sum equivalent to the alleged proceeds of crime. The case was scheduled for a hearing on 20th February 2020. en-us Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jun 2021 10:09:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295858 The Tribunal ordered both parties to maintain status quo regarding a property subject to an attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appellant argued that "possession" in Section 8(4) of the Act should be symbolic, not physical, to protect constitutional and human rights. The Tribunal accepted the appellant's arguments, noting potential irreparable harm if the eviction notice is enforced. The appellant was directed not to dispose of the property and to deposit a sum equivalent to the alleged proceeds of crime. The case was scheduled for a hearing on 20th February 2020. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295858