https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419519 The Court dismissed the petition, upholding the validity of the Directorate of Enforcement's attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The Court emphasized that the petitioner must seek redress through the statutory remedies available, rejecting the petitioner's plea to operate the attached bank account. The Court affirmed that a bank account with alleged proceeds of crime constitutes 'property' subject to attachment under the PMLA, and clarified that the Adjudicating Authority's jurisdiction does not preclude challenging the Provisional Attachment Order. en-us Thu, 10 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Mar 2022 17:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419519 The Court dismissed the petition, upholding the validity of the Directorate of Enforcement's attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The Court emphasized that the petitioner must seek redress through the statutory remedies available, rejecting the petitioner's plea to operate the attached bank account. The Court affirmed that a bank account with alleged proceeds of crime constitutes 'property' subject to attachment under the PMLA, and clarified that the Adjudicating Authority's jurisdiction does not preclude challenging the Provisional Attachment Order. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 10 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419519