https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796924 Retention of seized materials and cash, and continuation of freezing orders over bank and demat accounts, were justified under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The company was involved in collecting investor funds through false assurances of high returns, while the appellant's status as majority shareholder and authorised signatory, and the company's operation from his residential address, supported his involvement. Resignation as director before the stated crime period did not displace that connection. The appellants failed to establish an independent lawful source for the funds, shares, and other property. Where direct proceeds of crime are not fully traceable, equivalent-value property may be proceeded against, including property acquired before the crime period. en-us Mon, 27 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Aug 2026 08:30:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796924 Retention of seized materials and cash, and continuation of freezing orders over bank and demat accounts, were justified under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The company was involved in collecting investor funds through false assurances of high returns, while the appellant's status as majority shareholder and authorised signatory, and the company's operation from his residential address, supported his involvement. Resignation as director before the stated crime period did not displace that connection. The appellants failed to establish an independent lawful source for the funds, shares, and other property. Where direct proceeds of crime are not fully traceable, equivalent-value property may be proceeded against, including property acquired before the crime period. Case-Laws Money Laundering Mon, 27 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796924