https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750846 Money-laundering proceedings under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act are independent and sui generis; pendency of the scheduled offence does not bar action, provided the prosecution independently proves the existence of proceeds of crime and their laundering. The court held that the predicate case need not be completed before the PMLA case can proceed, and this issue was decided for Revenue. However, the prosecution failed to produce reliable admissible evidence linking the alleged property to criminal proceeds, relying instead on presumption rather than proof, so the acquittal was left undisturbed. The appellate court found no perversity or legal infirmity in the trial court's view. en-us Fri, 22 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Apr 2024 20:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750846 Money-laundering proceedings under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act are independent and sui generis; pendency of the scheduled offence does not bar action, provided the prosecution independently proves the existence of proceeds of crime and their laundering. The court held that the predicate case need not be completed before the PMLA case can proceed, and this issue was decided for Revenue. However, the prosecution failed to produce reliable admissible evidence linking the alleged property to criminal proceeds, relying instead on presumption rather than proof, so the acquittal was left undisturbed. The appellate court found no perversity or legal infirmity in the trial court's view. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 22 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750846