<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>PMLA bank-account freezing permits sealed reasons, while proceeds-of-crime disputes proceed through statutory adjudication and appeal.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104820</link>
    <description>Under the PMLA, where seizure is impracticable, an authorised officer may freeze bank accounts and related records. Reasons to believe must be recorded and forwarded with the relevant material to the Adjudicating Authority in sealed cover; they need not be reproduced in the freezing order. Non-disclosure of those reasons in the order therefore does not itself invalidate the restraint, provided the continuation application and show-cause process are initiated as prescribed. Whether all or part of the frozen funds represent proceeds of crime must be determined by the Adjudicating Authority after notice and hearing, subject to statutory appeal. Writ interference to defreeze the accounts was declined because statutory remedies remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 04:18:33 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 04:18:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=929173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>PMLA bank-account freezing permits sealed reasons, while proceeds-of-crime disputes proceed through statutory adjudication and appeal.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104820</link>
      <description>Under the PMLA, where seizure is impracticable, an authorised officer may freeze bank accounts and related records. Reasons to believe must be recorded and forwarded with the relevant material to the Adjudicating Authority in sealed cover; they need not be reproduced in the freezing order. Non-disclosure of those reasons in the order therefore does not itself invalidate the restraint, provided the continuation application and show-cause process are initiated as prescribed. Whether all or part of the frozen funds represent proceeds of crime must be determined by the Adjudicating Authority after notice and hearing, subject to statutory appeal. Writ interference to defreeze the accounts was declined because statutory remedies remained available.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 04:18:33 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104820</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>