https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784767 Provisional attachment under s.5(1) PMLA was challenged for alleged failure to record reasons to believe that the property was likely to be concealed, transferred, or dealt with to frustrate confiscation proceedings. The Tribunal held that the competent authority had formed and recorded the requisite satisfaction, and that the statutory standard of "likely" does not require proof of an imminent sale; immediate attachment can be justified to prevent frustration of proceedings. The attachment was therefore upheld. The challenge to valuation on the ground that the property value exceeded or was improperly assessed against proceeds of crime was rejected because PMLA provides no right to an independent valuation at the instance of the noticee, and the assessed property value was in any event lower than the proceeds of crime. Appeal dismissed. en-us Mon, 24 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 09:31:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784767 Provisional attachment under s.5(1) PMLA was challenged for alleged failure to record reasons to believe that the property was likely to be concealed, transferred, or dealt with to frustrate confiscation proceedings. The Tribunal held that the competent authority had formed and recorded the requisite satisfaction, and that the statutory standard of "likely" does not require proof of an imminent sale; immediate attachment can be justified to prevent frustration of proceedings. The attachment was therefore upheld. The challenge to valuation on the ground that the property value exceeded or was improperly assessed against proceeds of crime was rejected because PMLA provides no right to an independent valuation at the instance of the noticee, and the assessed property value was in any event lower than the proceeds of crime. Appeal dismissed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 24 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784767