https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782394 Parallel investigation under the Companies Act and PMLA was not treated as barred because Section 212 of the Companies Act applies only to offences under that Act and permits sharing of information with other agencies. A provisional attachment under Section 5(1) of PMLA was not read as requiring prior filing of a Section 173 CrPC report in every case; recorded reasons and available material were sufficient. Reason to believe must rest on objective material, and no separate pre-attachment hearing was required. Writ interference was declined where the statutory appellate remedy had been invoked. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Nov 2025 08:24:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782394 Parallel investigation under the Companies Act and PMLA was not treated as barred because Section 212 of the Companies Act applies only to offences under that Act and permits sharing of information with other agencies. A provisional attachment under Section 5(1) of PMLA was not read as requiring prior filing of a Section 173 CrPC report in every case; recorded reasons and available material were sufficient. Reason to believe must rest on objective material, and no separate pre-attachment hearing was required. Writ interference was declined where the statutory appellate remedy had been invoked. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 27 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782394