<?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 1362 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773249</link>
    <description>Properties purchased from funds diverted out of bank finance, together with rent generated from those assets, may be provisionally attached as proceeds of crime where the acquisition is traceable to tainted funds and no independent source is shown. The Tribunal accepted that the sanctioned loan was not used for its intended purpose, remained unpaid, and that the assets were linked to diverted funds transferred by the parent company. It also held that property acquired before the alleged crime period can still be attached as equivalent value when direct proceeds are unavailable. The provisional attachment was upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:34:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=830406" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1362 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773249</link>
      <description>Properties purchased from funds diverted out of bank finance, together with rent generated from those assets, may be provisionally attached as proceeds of crime where the acquisition is traceable to tainted funds and no independent source is shown. The Tribunal accepted that the sanctioned loan was not used for its intended purpose, remained unpaid, and that the assets were linked to diverted funds transferred by the parent company. It also held that property acquired before the alleged crime period can still be attached as equivalent value when direct proceeds are unavailable. The provisional attachment was upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>