https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771489 A jointly held property cannot be confirmed for attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 unless notice under section 8(1) is served on all joint holders; in the absence of such notice, the confirmation for that flat was set aside. Attachment of properties in the name of the other holder was sustained because the material linked them to proceeds of crime and the appellants failed to show lawful sources. The Tribunal held that recorded reasons to believe satisfied section 5(1), non-communication of those reasons did not vitiate the action, cross-examination was not required at the provisional stage, and the attachment was not barred by retrospectivity. en-us Thu, 22 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 May 2025 08:32:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771489 A jointly held property cannot be confirmed for attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 unless notice under section 8(1) is served on all joint holders; in the absence of such notice, the confirmation for that flat was set aside. Attachment of properties in the name of the other holder was sustained because the material linked them to proceeds of crime and the appellants failed to show lawful sources. The Tribunal held that recorded reasons to believe satisfied section 5(1), non-communication of those reasons did not vitiate the action, cross-examination was not required at the provisional stage, and the attachment was not barred by retrospectivity. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 22 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771489