<?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 (5) TMI 1690 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771418</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld the retention order for freezing bank amounts, mutual funds, shares and securities in a case involving offences under Section 51 of the Black Money Act, 2015. The appellant challenged the order claiming violation of natural justice due to non-supply of documents. The Tribunal found that relevant documents were served to the appellant, and the request for additional documents from the Income Tax Department was designed to delay proceedings. The appellant was already facing prosecution and had been assessed for tax violations. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, maintaining the seizure and freezing orders subject to the final outcome of the prosecution case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 May 2025 08:52:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=824340" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1690 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771418</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld the retention order for freezing bank amounts, mutual funds, shares and securities in a case involving offences under Section 51 of the Black Money Act, 2015. The appellant challenged the order claiming violation of natural justice due to non-supply of documents. The Tribunal found that relevant documents were served to the appellant, and the request for additional documents from the Income Tax Department was designed to delay proceedings. The appellant was already facing prosecution and had been assessed for tax violations. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, maintaining the seizure and freezing orders subject to the final outcome of the prosecution case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771418</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>