<?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 (12) TMI 1736 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196214</link>
    <description>A registered deed of absolute sale that records full payment and acknowledgement of consideration cannot be displaced by a later, unproved plea that the transfer was conditional on dishonoured cheques. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s reliance on cheque details unreliable, noted no satisfactory explanation for delayed presentation, and accepted that the respondent had not been shown to have colluded. Because no competent court had cancelled the sale deed or declared it void, title and possession remained with the vendee, leaving the appellant with no subsisting right to resist attachment of the flat. The attachment was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2017 08:11:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497171" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1736 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196214</link>
      <description>A registered deed of absolute sale that records full payment and acknowledgement of consideration cannot be displaced by a later, unproved plea that the transfer was conditional on dishonoured cheques. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s reliance on cheque details unreliable, noted no satisfactory explanation for delayed presentation, and accepted that the respondent had not been shown to have colluded. Because no competent court had cancelled the sale deed or declared it void, title and possession remained with the vendee, leaving the appellant with no subsisting right to resist attachment of the flat. The attachment was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196214</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>