<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1747 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462200</link>
    <description>The amended SARFAESI framework is described as giving secured creditors overriding priority for recovery of secured debts, even against attachment claims under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The commentary also states that where banks held prior mortgages, were not shown to be involved in the scheduled offence, and had no nexus with alleged laundering activity, the attachment of such properties is unsustainable against their secured interests. The practical effect, as stated, is that bona fide secured creditors retain recovery rights and the attached secured properties are released from the competing money-laundering attachment regime.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2025 02:59:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=825933" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1747 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462200</link>
      <description>The amended SARFAESI framework is described as giving secured creditors overriding priority for recovery of secured debts, even against attachment claims under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The commentary also states that where banks held prior mortgages, were not shown to be involved in the scheduled offence, and had no nexus with alleged laundering activity, the attachment of such properties is unsustainable against their secured interests. The practical effect, as stated, is that bona fide secured creditors retain recovery rights and the attached secured properties are released from the competing money-laundering attachment regime.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462200</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>