https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768196 Alleged delay in completion of the predicate offence investigation did not, by itself, invalidate or impede provisional attachment or its confirmation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The tribunal noted that an FIR had been registered, an ECIR recorded, and a prosecution complaint already filed in the money-laundering proceedings. Because the predicate agency was not a party, the claimed delay in that investigation could not be examined as a basis to interfere with the impugned order. No legal provision or authority was shown to establish that such delay alone defeated the proceedings. The appeals therefore failed. en-us Tue, 04 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Apr 2025 07:50:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768196 Alleged delay in completion of the predicate offence investigation did not, by itself, invalidate or impede provisional attachment or its confirmation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The tribunal noted that an FIR had been registered, an ECIR recorded, and a prosecution complaint already filed in the money-laundering proceedings. Because the predicate agency was not a party, the claimed delay in that investigation could not be examined as a basis to interfere with the impugned order. No legal provision or authority was shown to establish that such delay alone defeated the proceedings. The appeals therefore failed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 04 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768196