<?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>2018 (7) TMI 707 - ATPMLA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363399</link>
    <description>A bona fide secured creditor&#039;s mortgaged assets cannot be sustained under PMLA attachment proceedings absent proof that the property was derived from or connected with proceeds of crime. The Tribunal found that the properties had been acquired before the alleged criminal activity, validly mortgaged to the bank, and unsupported by any material showing the bank&#039;s involvement or any criminal nexus. It also held that later amendments to the secured-debt recovery statutes give priority to secured creditors, so the bank&#039;s recovery rights prevailed over the attachment. The confirmation of attachment was therefore set aside, and the bank was permitted to pursue recovery under the secured-credit framework.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2018 08:32:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=526644" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 707 - ATPMLA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363399</link>
      <description>A bona fide secured creditor&#039;s mortgaged assets cannot be sustained under PMLA attachment proceedings absent proof that the property was derived from or connected with proceeds of crime. The Tribunal found that the properties had been acquired before the alleged criminal activity, validly mortgaged to the bank, and unsupported by any material showing the bank&#039;s involvement or any criminal nexus. It also held that later amendments to the secured-debt recovery statutes give priority to secured creditors, so the bank&#039;s recovery rights prevailed over the attachment. The confirmation of attachment was therefore set aside, and the bank was permitted to pursue recovery under the secured-credit framework.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363399</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>