<?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>2019 (1) TMI 831 - ATPMLA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373666</link>
    <description>Attached movable properties were conditionally released because the valuation details were unclear and the appellants offered reasonable deposit values, with release made subject to payment within eight weeks. The residential house in the appellant&#039;s occupation was also restored on the basis that the family was residing there, the property would not be alienated pending disposal, and vacant possession served no useful purpose; restoration was made conditional on payment of monthly use and accommodation charges and arrears within the time fixed. The attachment order was therefore modified only to the extent of these conditional directions, while compliance with the deposit requirements remained mandatory.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2019 17:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 831 - ATPMLA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373666</link>
      <description>Attached movable properties were conditionally released because the valuation details were unclear and the appellants offered reasonable deposit values, with release made subject to payment within eight weeks. The residential house in the appellant&#039;s occupation was also restored on the basis that the family was residing there, the property would not be alienated pending disposal, and vacant possession served no useful purpose; restoration was made conditional on payment of monthly use and accommodation charges and arrears within the time fixed. The attachment order was therefore modified only to the extent of these conditional directions, while compliance with the deposit requirements remained mandatory.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373666</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>