Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 19 JUNE 2019

Offence Of Cross- Border Implications Under PMLA

Vaish Associates Advocates
Explore more from Vaish Associates Advocates

The offence of cross-border implications has been defined u/s 2(1)(ra) of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter, PMLA).

IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
Vijay Pal Dalmia
Vijay Pal Dalmia
Satyam Sharma
Satyam Sharma
Author LinkedIn connections

By Vijay Pal Dalmia, Advocate
Supreme Court of India & Delhi High Court
Mobile: +919810081079
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/vpdalmia/
Twitter: @vpdalmia
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/vpdalmia
AND -Satyam Sharma, Symbiosis Law School, Pune\\
Email Id: [email protected]

The offence of cross-border implications has been defined u/s 2(1)(ra) of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter, PMLA). The difference that needs to be understood before dwelling into the issue of cross-border implications is 'whether S. 2(1)(ra) of PMLA deals with the offence of cross-border implications' or 'whether the offence of money laundering has cross-border implications'. S. 2(1)(ra) deals with the latter and provides two instances when the offence of money laundering defined u/s 3 of PMLA would have cross-border implications. S. 2(1)(ra) of PMLA states that:

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

© 2026, Vaish Associates Advocates,
All rights reserved
Advocates, 1st & 11th Floors, Mohan Dev Building 13, Tolstoy Marg New Delhi-110001 (India).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

See more popular content from

Article

Punjab And Haryana High Court Strikes Down JAO - FAO Retrospective Amendment As Unconstitutional

The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court (HC) in Jyoti Sareen vs. UOI & Others (CWP No. 15791-2024 (O&M)) (Order) held the retrospective amendments carried out vide the Finance Act, 2026, with respect to the powers of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) to issue a reopening notice under section 148 (Reopening Notice) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (IT Act), as unconstitutional, being violative of the ‘doctrine of separation of powers’ and thus violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Article

Acquisition By An FOCC Of An Indian Company: Pricing Conditions For Resident And Non-resident Shareholders

A FOCC refers to an Indian entity that has received foreign investment and is ultimately owned or controlled by persons resident outside India. Although incorporated in India under the Companies Act, such entities are treated differently from domestically owned and controlled Indian companies for the purposes of foreign investment regulation and downstream investment structuring. Consequently, an FOCC, despite being an Indian incorporated entity, is subject to regulatory conditions applicable to foreign investment while undertaking investments into other Indian entities.
IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
LegaLogic
LegaLogic