https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792397 Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Tribunal held that a person claiming investment returns must produce contemporaneous proof of a genuine investment arrangement and explain the source of the funds said to have been invested. As no memorandum, agreement, or credible documentary support was produced, and the statutory burden under Section 24 was not rebutted, the claim of innocent investment was rejected and attachment on the basis of proceeds of crime was sustained. The Tribunal also held that property of equivalent value may be attached even if the original tainted assets are not traceable, so the fact that some assets predated the crime period did not prevent attachment. en-us Wed, 13 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 May 2026 08:21:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792397 Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Tribunal held that a person claiming investment returns must produce contemporaneous proof of a genuine investment arrangement and explain the source of the funds said to have been invested. As no memorandum, agreement, or credible documentary support was produced, and the statutory burden under Section 24 was not rebutted, the claim of innocent investment was rejected and attachment on the basis of proceeds of crime was sustained. The Tribunal also held that property of equivalent value may be attached even if the original tainted assets are not traceable, so the fact that some assets predated the crime period did not prevent attachment. Case-Laws Money Laundering Wed, 13 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792397