<?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 1413 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775345</link>
    <description>The AT under SAFEMA at New Delhi dismissed the appeal concerning the attachment of property under the PMLA linked to money laundering through falsified accounts of a company. It was established that part of the purchase price for the property originated from proceeds of crime traced to inflated share sales. The Tribunal held that proceeds of crime include property equivalent in value to that derived from criminal activity, regardless of legitimate sources used for acquisition. The Tribunal emphasized that PMLA&#039;s objective differs from SARFAESI Act and rejected the argument that SARFAESI overrides PMLA. The failure to provide an opportunity of hearing under Section 8 of PMLA was noted but did not alter the outcome. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2025 08:40:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=838260" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1413 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775345</link>
      <description>The AT under SAFEMA at New Delhi dismissed the appeal concerning the attachment of property under the PMLA linked to money laundering through falsified accounts of a company. It was established that part of the purchase price for the property originated from proceeds of crime traced to inflated share sales. The Tribunal held that proceeds of crime include property equivalent in value to that derived from criminal activity, regardless of legitimate sources used for acquisition. The Tribunal emphasized that PMLA&#039;s objective differs from SARFAESI Act and rejected the argument that SARFAESI overrides PMLA. The failure to provide an opportunity of hearing under Section 8 of PMLA was noted but did not alter the outcome. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775345</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>