https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410121 A challenge to an interlocutory protective order under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was found unwarranted because the existing attachment and undertaking already protected the Union's interest, and the appeal was viewed as an attempt to delay tribunal proceedings. The High Court declined interference and dismissed the appeals. In the connected remanded matter, where the tribunal had ordered rehearing and kept the merits open, the Court directed that the undertaking and status quo over the attached properties continue until fresh adjudication, in order to avoid prejudice and preserve the property position pending the tribunal's new decision. en-us Fri, 09 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Jul 2021 09:15:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410121 A challenge to an interlocutory protective order under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was found unwarranted because the existing attachment and undertaking already protected the Union's interest, and the appeal was viewed as an attempt to delay tribunal proceedings. The High Court declined interference and dismissed the appeals. In the connected remanded matter, where the tribunal had ordered rehearing and kept the merits open, the Court directed that the undertaking and status quo over the attached properties continue until fresh adjudication, in order to avoid prejudice and preserve the property position pending the tribunal's new decision. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 09 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410121