<?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>Petition dismissed challenging PMLA arrest; Section 19 arrest upheld despite Section 50 irregularities; facts for trial</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93600</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the petition challenging arrest and consequential proceedings under the PMLA, holding that the impugned arrest was supported by the authorized officer&#039;s recorded &quot;reason to believe&quot; and by material in possession of the ED, and that alleged procedural lapses-including non-issuance of a Section 50 notice and an erroneous recital of &quot;non-cooperation&quot; in the grounds of arrest-constituted irregularities but not illegality. The Court underscored that Sections 19 and 50 serve distinct functions, Section 50 is not a precondition to arrest under Section 19, and disputed factual issues regarding necessity of custody, preservation of evidence and further investigation are matters for the trial forum or Special Court, not for writ relief. Petition dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2025 08:33:52 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2025 08:33:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=860555" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Petition dismissed challenging PMLA arrest; Section 19 arrest upheld despite Section 50 irregularities; facts for trial</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93600</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the petition challenging arrest and consequential proceedings under the PMLA, holding that the impugned arrest was supported by the authorized officer&#039;s recorded &quot;reason to believe&quot; and by material in possession of the ED, and that alleged procedural lapses-including non-issuance of a Section 50 notice and an erroneous recital of &quot;non-cooperation&quot; in the grounds of arrest-constituted irregularities but not illegality. The Court underscored that Sections 19 and 50 serve distinct functions, Section 50 is not a precondition to arrest under Section 19, and disputed factual issues regarding necessity of custody, preservation of evidence and further investigation are matters for the trial forum or Special Court, not for writ relief. Petition dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2025 08:33:52 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93600</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>