https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780479 HC held the provisional attachment under PMLA ceased to operate as the 180-day period had expired even after excluding COVID-periods, so the impugned attachment no longer applies to the properties in which the petitioner claimed interest and is vacated to that extent. The court noted the stay in another matter did not extend the 180-day limit here and observed the Enforcement Directorate had not completed proceedings under Section 8(3). Application disposed. en-us Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Oct 2025 08:23:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780479 HC held the provisional attachment under PMLA ceased to operate as the 180-day period had expired even after excluding COVID-periods, so the impugned attachment no longer applies to the properties in which the petitioner claimed interest and is vacated to that extent. The court noted the stay in another matter did not extend the 180-day limit here and observed the Enforcement Directorate had not completed proceedings under Section 8(3). Application disposed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780479