<?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 (9) TMI 223 - ATPMLA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385455</link>
    <description>The tribunal held that the retention of seized items beyond the prescribed period was unjustified as no prosecution complaint was filed within the specified timeframe. The impugned order was set aside, and the seized items were ordered to be returned to the appellant within four weeks. The appeal was disposed of without costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 10:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=586205" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 223 - ATPMLA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385455</link>
      <description>The tribunal held that the retention of seized items beyond the prescribed period was unjustified as no prosecution complaint was filed within the specified timeframe. The impugned order was set aside, and the seized items were ordered to be returned to the appellant within four weeks. The appeal was disposed of without costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385455</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>