<?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 (12) TMI 1314 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783774</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether assets unconnected to the scheduled offence, including property acquired prior to the crime, can be provisionally attached as &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; on an equivalent value basis under the PMLA. Applying the three-limb definition of &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; and relying on binding precedent, the Tribunal held that the equivalent value limb permits attachment of other property when the actual tainted property is not traceable or has been siphoned off, since a narrower interpretation would defeat the Act&#039;s object and enable offenders to dissipate illicit gains. On this legal basis, the challenged Provisional Attachment Orders were sustained and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2025 07:59:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=873440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1314 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783774</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether assets unconnected to the scheduled offence, including property acquired prior to the crime, can be provisionally attached as &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; on an equivalent value basis under the PMLA. Applying the three-limb definition of &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; and relying on binding precedent, the Tribunal held that the equivalent value limb permits attachment of other property when the actual tainted property is not traceable or has been siphoned off, since a narrower interpretation would defeat the Act&#039;s object and enable offenders to dissipate illicit gains. On this legal basis, the challenged Provisional Attachment Orders were sustained and the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783774</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>