<?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 (4) TMI 2031 - MADRAS HIGH COURT </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299408</link>
    <description>A person summoned under section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 may be permitted to have an advocate present during interrogation in a non-intrusive manner, with the advocate sitting at a visible distance and beyond hearing distance, where this is needed to guard against coercion or forced statements and does not obstruct the enquiry. The earlier statement recorded from the summoned person was not ordered to be re-recorded merely because it had been subsequently retracted; its evidentiary value and veracity were left to be determined in accordance with law at the appropriate stage. The petition succeeded only to the extent of permitting counsel&#039;s presence during further interrogation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2021 08:38:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=663829" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 2031 - MADRAS HIGH COURT </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299408</link>
      <description>A person summoned under section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 may be permitted to have an advocate present during interrogation in a non-intrusive manner, with the advocate sitting at a visible distance and beyond hearing distance, where this is needed to guard against coercion or forced statements and does not obstruct the enquiry. The earlier statement recorded from the summoned person was not ordered to be re-recorded merely because it had been subsequently retracted; its evidentiary value and veracity were left to be determined in accordance with law at the appropriate stage. The petition succeeded only to the extent of permitting counsel&#039;s presence during further interrogation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>