TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
AI-powered research trained on the authentic TaxTMI database.
Launch AI Search →Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Highlights
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
The AT dismissed the appeals and upheld the provisional attachment of the respondent company's bank account as proceeds of crime. The Tribunal found multiple FIRs led to ECIR/PAO against the accused and that the respondent remained the recipient of allegedly tainted funds; no written cancellation or forfeiture notice under the booking agreement was produced and the rooms were not used, supporting inference the funds were sheltered to avoid attachment. The appellant director was neither an accused nor subject to attachment, and lacked standing to challenge the order. Absent demonstrable lawful cancellation or written forfeiture, the attachment of amounts transferred to the respondent was affirmed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
