https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783847 The dominant issue was whether the two attached properties constituted "proceeds of crime" under PMLA based on a demonstrable nexus with the scheduled offence. For the Alibaug property, the tribunal held that there was no FIR allegation of undervaluation and the authority failed to produce any money trail or prima facie material showing that purchase funds were derived from proceeds of crime or that the purchaser was a recipient or participant in the predicate offence; attachment was therefore unsustainable and set aside for that property. For the Mumbai (Dadar) property, the tribunal found the purchase was funded by a loan allegedly tainted in the lender's hands but repaid in full before ECIR registration, leaving no proceeds of crime with the purchaser; attachment was accordingly set aside and the appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Dec 2025 07:51:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783847 The dominant issue was whether the two attached properties constituted "proceeds of crime" under PMLA based on a demonstrable nexus with the scheduled offence. For the Alibaug property, the tribunal held that there was no FIR allegation of undervaluation and the authority failed to produce any money trail or prima facie material showing that purchase funds were derived from proceeds of crime or that the purchaser was a recipient or participant in the predicate offence; attachment was therefore unsustainable and set aside for that property. For the Mumbai (Dadar) property, the tribunal found the purchase was funded by a loan allegedly tainted in the lender's hands but repaid in full before ECIR registration, leaving no proceeds of crime with the purchaser; attachment was accordingly set aside and the appeal allowed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783847