https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763829 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed the appeal challenging retention of seized assets under PMLA. The Tribunal held that the retention order was passed within the statutory 180-day period, excluding the stay period as per statutory provisions. The appellant company, though not named in the predicate FIR, could be proceeded against under PMLA as money laundering is an independent offense. The Tribunal found the company was a sham entity created to hide proceeds of crime from the principal accused, with directors being his family members who failed to explain their income sources. The ED properly recorded reasons to believe under Section 17 PMLA, and the retention order was justified for adjudication purposes. en-us Mon, 28 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Dec 2024 10:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763829 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed the appeal challenging retention of seized assets under PMLA. The Tribunal held that the retention order was passed within the statutory 180-day period, excluding the stay period as per statutory provisions. The appellant company, though not named in the predicate FIR, could be proceeded against under PMLA as money laundering is an independent offense. The Tribunal found the company was a sham entity created to hide proceeds of crime from the principal accused, with directors being his family members who failed to explain their income sources. The ED properly recorded reasons to believe under Section 17 PMLA, and the retention order was justified for adjudication purposes. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 28 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763829