https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464893 The AT upheld the provisional attachment of properties under the PMLA, holding that the appellant failed to disclose any legitimate source for acquisition of the attached assets. It found that the predicate offence of money laundering commenced when funds were collected from investors, not on the later date of FIR registration, so properties allegedly acquired "prior" to the FIR could still represent proceeds of crime. The Tribunal held that, even assuming some assets predated the crime, properties of equivalent value could be attached. As the appellant did not produce documents showing lawful acquisition, the Tribunal rejected their arguments and dismissed the appeal. en-us Thu, 17 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Nov 2025 19:31:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464893 The AT upheld the provisional attachment of properties under the PMLA, holding that the appellant failed to disclose any legitimate source for acquisition of the attached assets. It found that the predicate offence of money laundering commenced when funds were collected from investors, not on the later date of FIR registration, so properties allegedly acquired "prior" to the FIR could still represent proceeds of crime. The Tribunal held that, even assuming some assets predated the crime, properties of equivalent value could be attached. As the appellant did not produce documents showing lawful acquisition, the Tribunal rejected their arguments and dismissed the appeal. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 17 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464893