<?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 1530 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459785</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld a possession notice issued under Section 8(4) of PMLA 2002 following confirmation of provisional attachment order. The appellant challenged the notice claiming lack of reasons and violation of natural justice principles. The Tribunal held that Section 8(4) permits possession as an exception, not as a rule, and does not mandate reasons in the notice itself. The case involved organized crime where property was purchased using proceeds of crime through fund diversion from associated companies. The Tribunal found sufficient money trail evidence showing criminal proceeds were used for property purchase. The appellant&#039;s application for interim relief was dismissed and the possession notice was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Dec 2024 00:31:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=784807" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 1530 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459785</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld a possession notice issued under Section 8(4) of PMLA 2002 following confirmation of provisional attachment order. The appellant challenged the notice claiming lack of reasons and violation of natural justice principles. The Tribunal held that Section 8(4) permits possession as an exception, not as a rule, and does not mandate reasons in the notice itself. The case involved organized crime where property was purchased using proceeds of crime through fund diversion from associated companies. The Tribunal found sufficient money trail evidence showing criminal proceeds were used for property purchase. The appellant&#039;s application for interim relief was dismissed and the possession notice was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459785</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>