https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98506 Where an attached residential property remained in the applicant's self-occupation, the Tribunal applied Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary to hold that taking physical possession before confiscation is exceptional, not routine. As no exceptional circumstance was shown and the Directorate did not establish any basis to displace the occupant, the applicant could retain possession and no notional rent could be demanded for the self-occupied property. The Tribunal also noted that the pending modification application had not been adjudicated earlier. The rights of mortgagee banks and secured creditors to proceed in accordance with law were left unaffected. en-us Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:40 +0530 Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98506 Where an attached residential property remained in the applicant's self-occupation, the Tribunal applied Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary to hold that taking physical possession before confiscation is exceptional, not routine. As no exceptional circumstance was shown and the Directorate did not establish any basis to displace the occupant, the applicant could retain possession and no notional rent could be demanded for the self-occupied property. The Tribunal also noted that the pending modification application had not been adjudicated earlier. The rights of mortgagee banks and secured creditors to proceed in accordance with law were left unaffected. Highlights Money Laundering Tue, 07 Apr 2026 07:48:40 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98506