<?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 1800 - ATPMLA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364492</link>
    <description>A bona fide secured creditor&#039;s mortgage, created before any nexus with alleged money laundering is established, is not liable to be treated as proceeds of crime merely because the assets are under attachment. The Tribunal found no material showing the bank&#039;s involvement in the scheduled offence or knowledge of any laundering process, and held that genuine mortgage documentation and absence of taint preserved the bank&#039;s security interest. It further recognised that later statutory amendments giving secured creditors priority override competing attachment claims, so the bank&#039;s right to recover from the mortgaged assets could not be defeated. The attachment was therefore set aside as against the bank&#039;s mortgaged properties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2018 07:44:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 1800 - ATPMLA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364492</link>
      <description>A bona fide secured creditor&#039;s mortgage, created before any nexus with alleged money laundering is established, is not liable to be treated as proceeds of crime merely because the assets are under attachment. The Tribunal found no material showing the bank&#039;s involvement in the scheduled offence or knowledge of any laundering process, and held that genuine mortgage documentation and absence of taint preserved the bank&#039;s security interest. It further recognised that later statutory amendments giving secured creditors priority override competing attachment claims, so the bank&#039;s right to recover from the mortgaged assets could not be defeated. The attachment was therefore set aside as against the bank&#039;s mortgaged properties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>