https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297780 Provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was upheld where the competent authority had materials to believe the attached properties were likely proceeds of crime and acted to prevent transfer or concealment. The High Court noted that the petitioners had already been given an opportunity before attachment, that the order was only provisional, and that their objections could be pursued in adjudication proceedings. It also recorded that the attachment was initiated after registration of the scheduled offences and found the action to be in conformity with the statutory scheme. The challenge based on breach of natural justice and non-compliance with Section 5 therefore failed. en-us Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Sep 2021 06:16:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297780 Provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was upheld where the competent authority had materials to believe the attached properties were likely proceeds of crime and acted to prevent transfer or concealment. The High Court noted that the petitioners had already been given an opportunity before attachment, that the order was only provisional, and that their objections could be pursued in adjudication proceedings. It also recorded that the attachment was initiated after registration of the scheduled offences and found the action to be in conformity with the statutory scheme. The challenge based on breach of natural justice and non-compliance with Section 5 therefore failed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297780