<?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 (11) TMI 541 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761555</link>
    <description>Under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018, an authorised officer must record reasons to believe, based on material in possession, before moving the Special Court, and the statutory thresholds for a warrant-linked scheduled offence and value of proceeds must be satisfied. The Delhi HC noted that the application disclosed the pending complaint, non-bailable warrant, the alleged proceeds of crime exceeding the threshold, the petitioner&#039;s absence from India, and the properties said to be proceeds of crime, and held that the statutory preconditions were met. It also held that an application filed in the prescribed form and manner required notice to be issued, so the challenge to the filing and notice stage failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2024 18:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777601" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 541 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761555</link>
      <description>Under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018, an authorised officer must record reasons to believe, based on material in possession, before moving the Special Court, and the statutory thresholds for a warrant-linked scheduled offence and value of proceeds must be satisfied. The Delhi HC noted that the application disclosed the pending complaint, non-bailable warrant, the alleged proceeds of crime exceeding the threshold, the petitioner&#039;s absence from India, and the properties said to be proceeds of crime, and held that the statutory preconditions were met. It also held that an application filed in the prescribed form and manner required notice to be issued, so the challenge to the filing and notice stage failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761555</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>