<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (12) TMI 528 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446844</link>
    <description>Money-laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is an independent and continuing offence concerned with dealing in proceeds of crime, so prosecution may proceed even if the predicate offence was notified as a scheduled offence later, and the relevant date is when the accused dealt with the proceeds. Possession of disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and money-laundering under the PMLA have distinct ingredients and operate in different fields, so a double jeopardy objection does not arise. A Special Court under the PMLA may take cognizance directly on a complaint by the authorised authority, and Section 202(2) CrPC inquiry is not mandatory before issuing summons.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2023 07:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=734932" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (12) TMI 528 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446844</link>
      <description>Money-laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is an independent and continuing offence concerned with dealing in proceeds of crime, so prosecution may proceed even if the predicate offence was notified as a scheduled offence later, and the relevant date is when the accused dealt with the proceeds. Possession of disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and money-laundering under the PMLA have distinct ingredients and operate in different fields, so a double jeopardy objection does not arise. A Special Court under the PMLA may take cognizance directly on a complaint by the authorised authority, and Section 202(2) CrPC inquiry is not mandatory before issuing summons.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>