(E) Further, ABT is considering the purchase of used plant and machinery but of the latest technology from 'Four Spin Limited' which is undergoing a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in accordance with the p

(E) Further, ABT is considering the purchase of used plant and machinery but of the latest technology from 'Four Spin Limited' which is undergoing a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in accordance with the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. ABT is waiting for the resolution plan to be unveiled through which they can understand which plant and machinery they can buy. But, in the meantime, an authorized Deputy Director from the office of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) conducted a 'Search and Seizure' at the premises of the Four Spin Limited and issued a provisional attachment order of 180 days under the relevant provisions of the prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, attaching properties of Four Spin Limited on the basis of findings during the search and seizure proceedings. In this order, the immovable and movable properties including plant and machinery were provisionally attached. The Insolvency Professional, C.S. Sudha Kumar, who was appointed as a Resolution Professional for CIRP of Four Spin Limited, opposed the order of provisional attachment of assets by ED on the grounds of declaration of moratorium by the Adjudicating Authority on the assets of Four Spin Limited as per the provisions of the IBC, 2016 and made an appeal seeking the release of assets. In respect of the inputs given in Para-E above, examine whether the appeal moved by C.S. Sudha Kumar, the appointed Resolution Professional of Four Spin Limited is tenable? Whether the assets so provisionally attached shall be released or not and provisions of which Act/Code will prevail? Provide your answer on the basis of the relevant case law as applicable to the facts of the case.