<?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>2015 (3) TMI 1437 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314059</link>
    <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, attachment is directed at property involved in laundering of proceeds of crime, not merely at the person charged with the scheduled offence. The text states that acquittal in the predicate offence does not by itself require release of attached property, and that the amended regime was not decisive because the properties were liable even under the unamended law on the facts found. It also states that partial taint is sufficient, so property need not be wholly funded by crime proceeds, and that layered transfers, unexplained repayments, and tainted funding can justify continued attachment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=753252" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 1437 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314059</link>
      <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, attachment is directed at property involved in laundering of proceeds of crime, not merely at the person charged with the scheduled offence. The text states that acquittal in the predicate offence does not by itself require release of attached property, and that the amended regime was not decisive because the properties were liable even under the unamended law on the facts found. It also states that partial taint is sufficient, so property need not be wholly funded by crime proceeds, and that layered transfers, unexplained repayments, and tainted funding can justify continued attachment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314059</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>