<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (5) TMI 875 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260001</link>
    <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, provisional attachment may be made before filing of a charge sheet where the statutory scheme and recorded material show proceeds of crime and a need to prevent frustration of proceedings. The Court treated the requirement of &quot;reasons to believe&quot; as demanding an honest, material-based opinion, and found the FIR, witness material and investigation record sufficient to support attachment. It also held that prior notice or hearing is not required at the Section 5 stage because the Act provides a post-decisional hearing and further statutory remedies, so a writ challenge on natural justice grounds was not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2016 15:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=386208" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 875 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260001</link>
      <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, provisional attachment may be made before filing of a charge sheet where the statutory scheme and recorded material show proceeds of crime and a need to prevent frustration of proceedings. The Court treated the requirement of &quot;reasons to believe&quot; as demanding an honest, material-based opinion, and found the FIR, witness material and investigation record sufficient to support attachment. It also held that prior notice or hearing is not required at the Section 5 stage because the Act provides a post-decisional hearing and further statutory remedies, so a writ challenge on natural justice grounds was not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260001</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>