https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754167 Provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 cannot survive once the predicate scheduled offence has been finally quashed. The text states that, on the reasoning in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, money-laundering action under Sections 3 and 4 depends on the existence of a scheduled offence, so discharge, quashment, or acquittal of the predicate case removes the statutory foundation for attachment and related proceedings. On that basis, the attachment order was held unsustainable and quashed. en-us Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Jun 2024 13:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754167 Provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 cannot survive once the predicate scheduled offence has been finally quashed. The text states that, on the reasoning in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, money-laundering action under Sections 3 and 4 depends on the existence of a scheduled offence, so discharge, quashment, or acquittal of the predicate case removes the statutory foundation for attachment and related proceedings. On that basis, the attachment order was held unsustainable and quashed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754167