https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96137 The Tribunal held that the dominant issue was whether property acquired before the predicate offence could be provisionally attached as "proceeds of crime" under Section 2(1)(u). Applying the second limb of the definition-where original proceeds are not traceable-the authority may attach property of equivalent value; precedent support was invoked. The challenge to jurisdictional change and denial of physical hearing was rejected because virtual hearing provided adequate opportunity and the appellant declined it, so no breach of natural justice. Factual findings that a portion of funds remained unreturned sustained the attachment. Appeals dismissed. - AT en-us Mon, 19 Jan 2026 07:36:44 +0530 Mon, 19 Jan 2026 07:36:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96137 The Tribunal held that the dominant issue was whether property acquired before the predicate offence could be provisionally attached as "proceeds of crime" under Section 2(1)(u). Applying the second limb of the definition-where original proceeds are not traceable-the authority may attach property of equivalent value; precedent support was invoked. The challenge to jurisdictional change and denial of physical hearing was rejected because virtual hearing provided adequate opportunity and the appellant declined it, so no breach of natural justice. Factual findings that a portion of funds remained unreturned sustained the attachment. Appeals dismissed. - AT Highlights Money Laundering Mon, 19 Jan 2026 07:36:44 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96137