https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468203 Retention or attachment under the money-laundering law is not confined to a person who is an accused in the scheduled offence; what matters is whether the seized property has a nexus with proceeds of crime. The tribunal found the statutory "reason to believe" threshold satisfied on the basis of material indicating suspicious financial transactions and possible concealment or deployment of funds, so the challenge to search and retention failed. It also held that the Enforcement Directorate may examine whether proceeds of crime exist and whether the seized material is linked to laundering, but it cannot re-investigate the predicate offence itself. Seized material not relied upon was directed to be returned. en-us Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Apr 2026 22:32:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468203 Retention or attachment under the money-laundering law is not confined to a person who is an accused in the scheduled offence; what matters is whether the seized property has a nexus with proceeds of crime. The tribunal found the statutory "reason to believe" threshold satisfied on the basis of material indicating suspicious financial transactions and possible concealment or deployment of funds, so the challenge to search and retention failed. It also held that the Enforcement Directorate may examine whether proceeds of crime exist and whether the seized material is linked to laundering, but it cannot re-investigate the predicate offence itself. Seized material not relied upon was directed to be returned. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468203