<?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>2023 (7) TMI 1476 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458085</link>
    <description>Wilful tax evasion relating to undisclosed foreign income and assets under the Black Money Act, 2015 was treated as a scheduled offence under the PMLA in its own right, without needing proof of cross-border implications under the general Part C definition. Provisional attachment under section 5(1) was held sustainable on recorded reasons and material in hand under the second proviso, even without a prior prosecution complaint or report, where immediate action was needed to prevent frustration of proceedings. The pre-existing origin of foreign assets did not bar action, because the operative focus remained the continuing non-disclosure after commencement of the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Oct 2024 07:30:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 1476 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458085</link>
      <description>Wilful tax evasion relating to undisclosed foreign income and assets under the Black Money Act, 2015 was treated as a scheduled offence under the PMLA in its own right, without needing proof of cross-border implications under the general Part C definition. Provisional attachment under section 5(1) was held sustainable on recorded reasons and material in hand under the second proviso, even without a prior prosecution complaint or report, where immediate action was needed to prevent frustration of proceedings. The pre-existing origin of foreign assets did not bar action, because the operative focus remained the continuing non-disclosure after commencement of the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458085</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>