PMLA Section 2(1)(u): provisional attachment valid when property is treated as untainted proceeds triggering ECIR, not acquisition date

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The AT dismissed the appeals and upheld provisional attachment under the PMLA, holding the relevant date for money-laundering is when alleged proceeds are projected as untainted property (triggering an ECIR) rather than date of acquisition. The Tribunal applied the extended definition of "proceeds of crime," including the second limb (value/equivalent property), rejecting appellants' contention that pre-offence acquisitions are immune where proceeds were allegedly siphoned off. It held ED need not re-investigate predicate offences already subject to police/CBI probe and sustained attachment despite appellants' limited declared assets, finding the quantum of fraud relevant to scheduled offence classification. Appeals dismissed; victim bank permitted to assert its claims; criminal trials unaffected.....