<?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>2011 (8) TMI 1247 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188596</link>
    <description>Money-laundering under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act requires a prima facie scheduled offence, property derived from that criminal activity, and projection of that property as untainted. Where the prosecution cannot satisfactorily establish the scheduled offence said to have generated the funds, foreign bank accounts and large transactions alone do not prove proceeds of crime. The burden-shifting provision does not remove the prosecution&#039;s foundational duty to show a specific scheduled offence and a traceable nexus with the alleged funds. On the facts described, the material was insufficient to sustain the money-laundering case, and bail was granted because continued detention was not justified on unparticularised allegations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2016 15:36:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=450854" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 1247 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188596</link>
      <description>Money-laundering under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act requires a prima facie scheduled offence, property derived from that criminal activity, and projection of that property as untainted. Where the prosecution cannot satisfactorily establish the scheduled offence said to have generated the funds, foreign bank accounts and large transactions alone do not prove proceeds of crime. The burden-shifting provision does not remove the prosecution&#039;s foundational duty to show a specific scheduled offence and a traceable nexus with the alleged funds. On the facts described, the material was insufficient to sustain the money-laundering case, and bail was granted because continued detention was not justified on unparticularised allegations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188596</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>