<?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>2025 (3) TMI 1353 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767967</link>
    <description>A civil decree and execution proceedings could not defeat provisional attachment where the property had already been conveyed to a company not bound by the decree, and no separate cancellation of the registered sale deed had been obtained. The Tribunal treated the prior transfer reflected in revenue and registration records as decisive against the appellants&#039; collateral claim of title. It further held that property traced to funds collected from investors in a large-scale fraud could be attached as proceeds of crime under the money laundering framework. On that basis, the challenge to the attachment failed and the confirmation of attachment was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2025 08:31:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=809914" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1353 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767967</link>
      <description>A civil decree and execution proceedings could not defeat provisional attachment where the property had already been conveyed to a company not bound by the decree, and no separate cancellation of the registered sale deed had been obtained. The Tribunal treated the prior transfer reflected in revenue and registration records as decisive against the appellants&#039; collateral claim of title. It further held that property traced to funds collected from investors in a large-scale fraud could be attached as proceeds of crime under the money laundering framework. On that basis, the challenge to the attachment failed and the confirmation of attachment was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767967</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>