<?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>2020 (5) TMI 320 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395287</link>
    <description>The court upheld the maintainability of writ petitions challenging notices under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, issued by the Enforcement Directorate. The Adjudicating Authority&#039;s provisional attachment orders were confirmed, allowing for appeals before the Appellate Tribunal. Due to the national lockdown, the court directed respondents not to enforce the notices for fifteen days or until the Tribunal&#039;s hearing, whichever is earlier. Additionally, the Tribunal could consider appeal documents without physical signatures during the lockdown, with appellants required to rectify any defects post-lockdown. The court disposed of the petitions based on these directives.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 May 2020 11:05:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=612977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (5) TMI 320 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395287</link>
      <description>The court upheld the maintainability of writ petitions challenging notices under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, issued by the Enforcement Directorate. The Adjudicating Authority&#039;s provisional attachment orders were confirmed, allowing for appeals before the Appellate Tribunal. Due to the national lockdown, the court directed respondents not to enforce the notices for fifteen days or until the Tribunal&#039;s hearing, whichever is earlier. Additionally, the Tribunal could consider appeal documents without physical signatures during the lockdown, with appellants required to rectify any defects post-lockdown. The court disposed of the petitions based on these directives.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395287</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>