https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753981 Under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, summons under Section 50(2) were treated as valid where investigation material, statements and seized records justified calling a person to explain possession and source of property, even if every summons did not disclose full crime particulars. Arrest and remand were not treated as illegal because arrest memo, grounds of arrest and Section 19 compliance were furnished, and a competent remand order is generally not amenable to habeas corpus challenge absent wholesale statutory non-compliance. The Court also accepted prima facie material showing possession, concealment and use of alleged proceeds of crime, and the fact that the property was not in the petitioner's name was not decisive. en-us Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Jun 2024 15:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753981 Under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, summons under Section 50(2) were treated as valid where investigation material, statements and seized records justified calling a person to explain possession and source of property, even if every summons did not disclose full crime particulars. Arrest and remand were not treated as illegal because arrest memo, grounds of arrest and Section 19 compliance were furnished, and a competent remand order is generally not amenable to habeas corpus challenge absent wholesale statutory non-compliance. The Court also accepted prima facie material showing possession, concealment and use of alleged proceeds of crime, and the fact that the property was not in the petitioner's name was not decisive. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753981