https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785935 Subsequent developments rendered the appeal academic, so the Court declined to decide the larger question of law. Without prejudice to either side's rights and contentions, it directed that the subject properties be treated as restored to the resolution applicant under Section 8(8) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 read with Rule 3A of the Prevention of Money Laundering (Restoration of Property) Rules, 2016, and that possession be handed over. The legal question on restoration therefore remained open. en-us Fri, 23 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Feb 2026 08:38:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785935 Subsequent developments rendered the appeal academic, so the Court declined to decide the larger question of law. Without prejudice to either side's rights and contentions, it directed that the subject properties be treated as restored to the resolution applicant under Section 8(8) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 read with Rule 3A of the Prevention of Money Laundering (Restoration of Property) Rules, 2016, and that possession be handed over. The legal question on restoration therefore remained open. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 23 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785935