https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794129 Writ jurisdiction may still be invoked despite statutory remedies under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 where the challenge goes to the root of jurisdiction. The Gauhati HC found that the Authorized Officer had sufficient material, including investigation records, statements, seized documents, GST data and financial trail evidence, to form the requisite reason to believe for provisional attachment. It further held that property purchased before the scheduled offence could still be attached as equivalent value of proceeds of crime. The Court also held that disclosure of recorded reasons in the attachment order was not prohibited by the statute or rules and did not by itself vitiate jurisdiction, while referring confidentiality issues to a larger bench. en-us Fri, 26 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jul 2026 08:47:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794129 Writ jurisdiction may still be invoked despite statutory remedies under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 where the challenge goes to the root of jurisdiction. The Gauhati HC found that the Authorized Officer had sufficient material, including investigation records, statements, seized documents, GST data and financial trail evidence, to form the requisite reason to believe for provisional attachment. It further held that property purchased before the scheduled offence could still be attached as equivalent value of proceeds of crime. The Court also held that disclosure of recorded reasons in the attachment order was not prohibited by the statute or rules and did not by itself vitiate jurisdiction, while referring confidentiality issues to a larger bench. Case-Laws Money Laundering Fri, 26 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794129