https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778386 HC dismissed the appeal and affirmed the AT's impugned order. The HC held the AA's order confirming retention was legally unsustainable for failing to give reasons and for not conducting the mandatory independent inquiry under Sections 8(2)-8(3) of the PMLA; absence of a respondent's reply did not relieve the AA of its duty. While recognizing leniency may apply to condonation of delay in re-filing, the court declined detailed scrutiny of a 143-day delay given the appeal's six-year pendency, and found no ground to interfere with the AT's decision. en-us Fri, 12 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Sep 2025 09:02:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778386 HC dismissed the appeal and affirmed the AT's impugned order. The HC held the AA's order confirming retention was legally unsustainable for failing to give reasons and for not conducting the mandatory independent inquiry under Sections 8(2)-8(3) of the PMLA; absence of a respondent's reply did not relieve the AA of its duty. While recognizing leniency may apply to condonation of delay in re-filing, the court declined detailed scrutiny of a 143-day delay given the appeal's six-year pendency, and found no ground to interfere with the AT's decision. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 12 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778386