https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762579 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA at Delhi allowed appeals challenging a provisional attachment order. The appellant argued that no prosecution complaint was filed against any accused within 365 days of the attachment order, requiring it to lapse. The Tribunal held that freezing/attachment continues during investigation within 365 days or case pendency, but since over two years had passed without prosecution complaint filing, the freezing order lapsed due to efflux of time. The impugned order was set aside and appeals allowed. en-us Mon, 04 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Dec 2024 12:41:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762579 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA at Delhi allowed appeals challenging a provisional attachment order. The appellant argued that no prosecution complaint was filed against any accused within 365 days of the attachment order, requiring it to lapse. The Tribunal held that freezing/attachment continues during investigation within 365 days or case pendency, but since over two years had passed without prosecution complaint filing, the freezing order lapsed due to efflux of time. The impugned order was set aside and appeals allowed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 04 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762579