<?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>2024 (10) TMI 225 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759626</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed appeals challenging ED&#039;s retention order for documents and bank accounts seized during money laundering investigation. The tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s interim order allowing continued seizure/freezing of materials until investigation completion. Since prosecution complaint was already filed under PMLA with appellants as accused persons and seized property listed for potential confiscation upon conviction, the retention order was deemed necessary for trial protection. Appeals were dismissed as meritless, though appellants were granted rights to copies of relied-upon documents and could apply for release of unrequired materials.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2024 08:54:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=771799" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 225 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759626</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA dismissed appeals challenging ED&#039;s retention order for documents and bank accounts seized during money laundering investigation. The tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s interim order allowing continued seizure/freezing of materials until investigation completion. Since prosecution complaint was already filed under PMLA with appellants as accused persons and seized property listed for potential confiscation upon conviction, the retention order was deemed necessary for trial protection. Appeals were dismissed as meritless, though appellants were granted rights to copies of relied-upon documents and could apply for release of unrequired materials.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759626</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>