<?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>Provisional Attachment Orders Upheld Under PMLA Section 50(2) Due to Failure to Prove Legitimate Fund Sources</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90781</link>
    <description>The AT dismissed all appeals challenging the provisional attachment orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appellants failed to satisfactorily disclose legitimate sources for the funds used to acquire properties or repay loans, with statements under Section 50(2) of the Act corroborating the involvement of proceeds of crime. The tribunal found that the properties and transactions were part of layering operations orchestrated by the main accused to conceal illicit funds. Despite claims of gifts and income, appellants could not provide adequate documentary evidence or credible explanations to rebut the attachment. The respondent&#039;s actions in attaching properties and bank accounts linked to the accused and their relatives wer.....</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2025 08:25:32 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2025 08:25:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=837787" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Provisional Attachment Orders Upheld Under PMLA Section 50(2) Due to Failure to Prove Legitimate Fund Sources</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90781</link>
      <description>The AT dismissed all appeals challenging the provisional attachment orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appellants failed to satisfactorily disclose legitimate sources for the funds used to acquire properties or repay loans, with statements under Section 50(2) of the Act corroborating the involvement of proceeds of crime. The tribunal found that the properties and transactions were part of layering operations orchestrated by the main accused to conceal illicit funds. Despite claims of gifts and income, appellants could not provide adequate documentary evidence or credible explanations to rebut the attachment. The respondent&#039;s actions in attaching properties and bank accounts linked to the accused and their relatives wer.....</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2025 08:25:32 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>