<?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 929 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772816</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA ruled that SARFAESI proceedings by mortgagee banks take precedence over PMLA attachment proceedings. Bona fide auction purchasers who acquired properties through bank auctions retain ownership rights, and their properties were wrongfully attached by ED. The tribunal set aside attachments on flats purchased at auction, protecting legitimate purchasers&#039; rights. Secured creditors and liquidators can stake claims before the Special Judge under Section 8(7) PMLA with undertaking to deposit excess amounts. The decision balanced anti-money laundering objectives with legitimate proprietary and creditor rights.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Jun 2025 06:47:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=829068" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 929 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772816</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA ruled that SARFAESI proceedings by mortgagee banks take precedence over PMLA attachment proceedings. Bona fide auction purchasers who acquired properties through bank auctions retain ownership rights, and their properties were wrongfully attached by ED. The tribunal set aside attachments on flats purchased at auction, protecting legitimate purchasers&#039; rights. Secured creditors and liquidators can stake claims before the Special Judge under Section 8(7) PMLA with undertaking to deposit excess amounts. The decision balanced anti-money laundering objectives with legitimate proprietary and creditor rights.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772816</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>