https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757823 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed an appeal challenging property attachment in a money laundering case. The appellant contended that property acquired in 1998, prior to the offense commission date, could not be attached. The Tribunal rejected this argument, citing SC precedent in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, which permits attachment of other assets as equivalent value when direct proceeds of crime are unavailable. The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's attachment order, finding the appellant received her share from crime proceeds along with family members, making the property rightfully attachable despite pre-offense acquisition. en-us Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2024 08:26:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757823 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed an appeal challenging property attachment in a money laundering case. The appellant contended that property acquired in 1998, prior to the offense commission date, could not be attached. The Tribunal rejected this argument, citing SC precedent in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, which permits attachment of other assets as equivalent value when direct proceeds of crime are unavailable. The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's attachment order, finding the appellant received her share from crime proceeds along with family members, making the property rightfully attachable despite pre-offense acquisition. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 06 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757823