<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Special leave petition dismissed challenging provisional attachment under PMLA; where statutory appellate remedy exists, writ relief declined.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93128</link>
    <description>SC dismissed the special leave petition challenging a provisional attachment order under the PMLA, upholding the High Court&#039;s refusal to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 where a specific statutory appellate remedy is available. The Court held that the High Court&#039;s exercise of discretion to decline writ relief was neither arbitrary nor perverse. Accordingly, the petitioner&#039;s challenge is dismissed, with the petitioner granted liberty to pursue the prescribed appellate remedy under the statute. The decision affirms that where a statutory remedy exists, extraordinary constitutional writ jurisdiction will generally be declined, and parties must resort to the designated appellate forum for adjudication of attachment and related relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:49 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=856708" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Special leave petition dismissed challenging provisional attachment under PMLA; where statutory appellate remedy exists, writ relief declined.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93128</link>
      <description>SC dismissed the special leave petition challenging a provisional attachment order under the PMLA, upholding the High Court&#039;s refusal to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 where a specific statutory appellate remedy is available. The Court held that the High Court&#039;s exercise of discretion to decline writ relief was neither arbitrary nor perverse. Accordingly, the petitioner&#039;s challenge is dismissed, with the petitioner granted liberty to pursue the prescribed appellate remedy under the statute. The decision affirms that where a statutory remedy exists, extraordinary constitutional writ jurisdiction will generally be declined, and parties must resort to the designated appellate forum for adjudication of attachment and related relief.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:49 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93128</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>