<?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 (5) TMI 1463 - ATPMLA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380735</link>
    <description>A provisional attachment under money-laundering law cannot be sustained against a bona fide secured creditor where the mortgage predates the alleged offence and the record does not show the creditor&#039;s involvement or that the property is proceeds of crime as against that creditor. The record must also disclose an independent, valid reason to believe before attachment is invoked. Here, the notice and confirmation order ignored the secured creditor&#039;s reply and claim, and were treated as mechanical. On those facts, continuation of the attachment at the confirmation stage was not justified, and the confirmation order was liable to be set aside for the mortgaged property.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 May 2019 07:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=572878" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1463 - ATPMLA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380735</link>
      <description>A provisional attachment under money-laundering law cannot be sustained against a bona fide secured creditor where the mortgage predates the alleged offence and the record does not show the creditor&#039;s involvement or that the property is proceeds of crime as against that creditor. The record must also disclose an independent, valid reason to believe before attachment is invoked. Here, the notice and confirmation order ignored the secured creditor&#039;s reply and claim, and were treated as mechanical. On those facts, continuation of the attachment at the confirmation stage was not justified, and the confirmation order was liable to be set aside for the mortgaged property.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380735</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>