https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770045 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed an appeal challenging provisional attachment of Rs. 2.02 crores under PMLA, 2002. The appellant argued the amount was already forfeited under a sale agreement before attachment. The Tribunal held that PMLA provisions override contractual agreements due to their overriding effect. The attached funds constituted proceeds of crime from a bank fraud scheme involving kite-flying and duping State Bank of India of Rs. 46.42 crores. The Tribunal ruled that proceeds of crime can be validly attached regardless of current holder's knowledge of tainted nature, citing SC precedent in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. The retrospectivity argument was rejected as money laundering offense timing depends on laundering acts, not predicate offense timing. en-us Wed, 02 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 May 2025 09:58:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770045 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed an appeal challenging provisional attachment of Rs. 2.02 crores under PMLA, 2002. The appellant argued the amount was already forfeited under a sale agreement before attachment. The Tribunal held that PMLA provisions override contractual agreements due to their overriding effect. The attached funds constituted proceeds of crime from a bank fraud scheme involving kite-flying and duping State Bank of India of Rs. 46.42 crores. The Tribunal ruled that proceeds of crime can be validly attached regardless of current holder's knowledge of tainted nature, citing SC precedent in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary. The retrospectivity argument was rejected as money laundering offense timing depends on laundering acts, not predicate offense timing. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 02 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770045