https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409094 In a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, interim attachment findings by the Adjudicating Authority do not bind the criminal court, particularly where the statutory appeal is pending and the adjudication has not attained finality. A brief cognizance order is not invalid merely because it is not elaborate, if the complaint and accompanying statements and documents disclose sufficient grounds for proceeding. A prosecution based on a forensic audit report and disputed money-trail allegations is not liable to be quashed where those issues raise contested facts for trial. The criminal proceedings were allowed to continue. en-us Tue, 23 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Jun 2021 09:59:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409094 In a prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, interim attachment findings by the Adjudicating Authority do not bind the criminal court, particularly where the statutory appeal is pending and the adjudication has not attained finality. A brief cognizance order is not invalid merely because it is not elaborate, if the complaint and accompanying statements and documents disclose sufficient grounds for proceeding. A prosecution based on a forensic audit report and disputed money-trail allegations is not liable to be quashed where those issues raise contested facts for trial. The criminal proceedings were allowed to continue. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 23 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409094