<?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 (3) TMI 1441 - ATPMLA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377420</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned order and directing the respondents to return the seized properties to the appellants as the statutory period for retention had expired without any prosecution complaint being filed. The tribunal emphasized the importance of strict compliance with statutory requirements under PMLA.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 09:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=564592" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1441 - ATPMLA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377420</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned order and directing the respondents to return the seized properties to the appellants as the statutory period for retention had expired without any prosecution complaint being filed. The tribunal emphasized the importance of strict compliance with statutory requirements under PMLA.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>