https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159782 Under SAFEMA, a detention order forming the basis of forfeiture proceedings cannot be collaterally challenged if its validity was not successfully questioned earlier, so the detention objection failed. The Act also does not require a Section 6(1) notice to expressly recite the nexus between the detenu and the properties sought to be forfeited; it is sufficient that the competent authority records reasons to believe that the property is illegally acquired, after which the burden shifts to the noticee to prove lawful acquisition. On that basis, the forfeiture order was upheld. en-us Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159782 Under SAFEMA, a detention order forming the basis of forfeiture proceedings cannot be collaterally challenged if its validity was not successfully questioned earlier, so the detention objection failed. The Act also does not require a Section 6(1) notice to expressly recite the nexus between the detenu and the properties sought to be forfeited; it is sufficient that the competent authority records reasons to believe that the property is illegally acquired, after which the burden shifts to the noticee to prove lawful acquisition. On that basis, the forfeiture order was upheld. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159782