https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85375 HC affirmed the validity of summons issued by Enforcement Directorate under Section 50(2) of PMLA. The subsequent summons for further investigation was permissible under Section 44(1)(d) Explanation (ii), despite the alleged offense predating the amendment. The court emphasized that judicial interference at summons stage could prejudice money laundering investigations. The ruling stressed that investigating agencies must be allowed to function freely to collect evidence and statements following PMLA procedures. Courts should avoid granting unwarranted leniency that could hamper investigations or allow evasion of PMLA proceedings. Petitioners were directed to comply with summons and provide required documents and explanations. Petition dismissed. en-us Sat, 01 Feb 2025 08:41:22 +0530 Sat, 01 Feb 2025 08:41:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85375 HC affirmed the validity of summons issued by Enforcement Directorate under Section 50(2) of PMLA. The subsequent summons for further investigation was permissible under Section 44(1)(d) Explanation (ii), despite the alleged offense predating the amendment. The court emphasized that judicial interference at summons stage could prejudice money laundering investigations. The ruling stressed that investigating agencies must be allowed to function freely to collect evidence and statements following PMLA procedures. Courts should avoid granting unwarranted leniency that could hamper investigations or allow evasion of PMLA proceedings. Petitioners were directed to comply with summons and provide required documents and explanations. Petition dismissed. Highlights Money Laundering Sat, 01 Feb 2025 08:41:22 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85375