A businessman received Rs. 50 lakhs from his relative through a gift deed. The relative claims the amount came from "old savings." A PMLA investigation is initiated based on suspicion that the amount is proceeds of narcotics trafficking. Which statements are correct? Statement 1: The gift deed is valid evidence that the property is not proceeds of crime. Statement 2: The relative must explain the source of the old savings under the reverse burden framework. Statement 3: If the relative cannot satisfactorily explain the source, the amount becomes liable for attachment. Statement 4: The businessman is automatically liable for PMLA violations if the relative's source is illicit. Which statements are correct?