<?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 (7) TMI 158 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774090</link>
    <description>The SC allowed substitution of provisionally attached property under PMLA with unencumbered commercial units valued at INR 317 crores. The petitioner offered 317 commercial units as substitute assets, which ED consented to with conditions. The Court imposed stringent safeguards including no encumbrance certificate, undertaking against alienation, deposit of original title documents, indemnity bond, and disclosure of acquisition funds. The substitution was granted without prejudice to ED&#039;s rights and ongoing investigation, explicitly stating it does not acknowledge legality of attached properties. Third-party retail buyers&#039; transactions in the project remain unaffected by enforcement proceedings. The order balances enforcement interests with petitioner&#039;s rights while protecting bona fide third parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2025 08:34:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=833393" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 158 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774090</link>
      <description>The SC allowed substitution of provisionally attached property under PMLA with unencumbered commercial units valued at INR 317 crores. The petitioner offered 317 commercial units as substitute assets, which ED consented to with conditions. The Court imposed stringent safeguards including no encumbrance certificate, undertaking against alienation, deposit of original title documents, indemnity bond, and disclosure of acquisition funds. The substitution was granted without prejudice to ED&#039;s rights and ongoing investigation, explicitly stating it does not acknowledge legality of attached properties. Third-party retail buyers&#039; transactions in the project remain unaffected by enforcement proceedings. The order balances enforcement interests with petitioner&#039;s rights while protecting bona fide third parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>