<?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>2024 (12) TMI 1716 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467371</link>
    <description>Provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is sustainable where credible material shows property transfers were collusive and intended to frustrate confiscation; the tribunal applied the principle that a general power of attorney does not by itself transfer title and evaluated timing of sale registrations, absence of contemporaneous consideration, and inconsistent ownership assertions as evidence of concealment or transfer risk, concluding the statutory prerequisites for provisional attachment were met and that the appellant did not prove bona fide purchaser status, with the appeal dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2026 19:04:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=890879" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1716 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467371</link>
      <description>Provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act is sustainable where credible material shows property transfers were collusive and intended to frustrate confiscation; the tribunal applied the principle that a general power of attorney does not by itself transfer title and evaluated timing of sale registrations, absence of contemporaneous consideration, and inconsistent ownership assertions as evidence of concealment or transfer risk, concluding the statutory prerequisites for provisional attachment were met and that the appellant did not prove bona fide purchaser status, with the appeal dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467371</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>