https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311076 A writ petition was maintainable because part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction where bank accounts had been attached. However, the Court declined interference with the provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, since a complete statutory adjudicatory mechanism under Section 8 was available to test the validity of the attachment and determine whether the properties were involved in money laundering. As the dispute involved prima facie allegations linked to a scheduled offence and disputed factual issues, the Court left the parties to pursue the statutory process and dismissed the petition. en-us Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Dec 2023 06:21:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311076 A writ petition was maintainable because part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction where bank accounts had been attached. However, the Court declined interference with the provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, since a complete statutory adjudicatory mechanism under Section 8 was available to test the validity of the attachment and determine whether the properties were involved in money laundering. As the dispute involved prima facie allegations linked to a scheduled offence and disputed factual issues, the Court left the parties to pursue the statutory process and dismissed the petition. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311076