https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766199 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed the appeal challenging a Provisional Attachment Order under PMLA. The appellants argued that authorities failed to record proper satisfaction under sections 5 and 8, properties were purchased before the alleged predicate offense, and funds were utilized for legitimate business purposes in April 2008. The Tribunal held that procedural requirements were met with detailed reasons recorded by respondents. Properties acquired before the alleged crime can be attached if they represent proceeds of crime value under the three-limb definition. The retrospective application of PMLA is constitutionally valid as attachment constitutes civil action. With criminal proceedings still pending and prosecution complaint filed under PMLA, balance of interests favored continued attachment without disturbing ownership title or possession rights. en-us Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Feb 2025 08:02:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766199 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed the appeal challenging a Provisional Attachment Order under PMLA. The appellants argued that authorities failed to record proper satisfaction under sections 5 and 8, properties were purchased before the alleged predicate offense, and funds were utilized for legitimate business purposes in April 2008. The Tribunal held that procedural requirements were met with detailed reasons recorded by respondents. Properties acquired before the alleged crime can be attached if they represent proceeds of crime value under the three-limb definition. The retrospective application of PMLA is constitutionally valid as attachment constitutes civil action. With criminal proceedings still pending and prosecution complaint filed under PMLA, balance of interests favored continued attachment without disturbing ownership title or possession rights. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766199