<?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 (6) TMI 193 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772080</link>
    <description>Money received through banking channels as consideration for a genuine transfer of shares could not be treated as proceeds of crime without first identifying the correct property traceable to such proceeds. On that basis, the attachment relating to the amount of 2.84 crores was unsustainable and was set aside. The challenge to the remaining attachment issue was not accepted for release, and the existing possession arrangement was directed to continue, with the appellants undertaking not to alienate or transfer the property until trial concludes. The protective arrangement was kept without prejudice to the trial court&#039;s consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 08:40:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=826583" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 193 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772080</link>
      <description>Money received through banking channels as consideration for a genuine transfer of shares could not be treated as proceeds of crime without first identifying the correct property traceable to such proceeds. On that basis, the attachment relating to the amount of 2.84 crores was unsustainable and was set aside. The challenge to the remaining attachment issue was not accepted for release, and the existing possession arrangement was directed to continue, with the appellants undertaking not to alienate or transfer the property until trial concludes. The protective arrangement was kept without prejudice to the trial court&#039;s consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772080</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>