<?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 (8) TMI 1116 - ATPMLA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365644</link>
    <description>The tribunal set aside the impugned order against the appellant regarding the flats, quashing the provisional attachment order. It found the appellant to be a bona fide purchaser with a legitimate interest in the property, lacking any connection to the accused or money laundering. The tribunal clarified its limited jurisdiction to determine money laundering involvement and emphasized that its decision did not affect other pending proceedings against the accused parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:44:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=531485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1116 - ATPMLA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365644</link>
      <description>The tribunal set aside the impugned order against the appellant regarding the flats, quashing the provisional attachment order. It found the appellant to be a bona fide purchaser with a legitimate interest in the property, lacking any connection to the accused or money laundering. The tribunal clarified its limited jurisdiction to determine money laundering involvement and emphasized that its decision did not affect other pending proceedings against the accused parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365644</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>