<?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 (3) TMI 1534 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467370</link>
    <description>Liability for money laundering under the PMLA depends on a person&#039;s later involvement with proceeds of crime, including possession, acquisition, concealment or projection as untainted, and is not defeated merely because the underlying assets were acquired before the 2009 amendment adding the predicate offence to the Schedule. In a disproportionate assets matter, the tribunal noted that the FIR, ECIR and charge-sheet post-dated the amendment and that the alleged disproportionate assets exceeded the value of the attached properties. On that basis, prior acquisition of the property did not bar its treatment as proceeds of crime, and the provisional attachment was confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 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=890880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 1534 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467370</link>
      <description>Liability for money laundering under the PMLA depends on a person&#039;s later involvement with proceeds of crime, including possession, acquisition, concealment or projection as untainted, and is not defeated merely because the underlying assets were acquired before the 2009 amendment adding the predicate offence to the Schedule. In a disproportionate assets matter, the tribunal noted that the FIR, ECIR and charge-sheet post-dated the amendment and that the alleged disproportionate assets exceeded the value of the attached properties. On that basis, prior acquisition of the property did not bar its treatment as proceeds of crime, and the provisional attachment was confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467370</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>