<?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>2022 (12) TMI 1603 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468361</link>
    <description>Non-supply of an ECIR does not, by itself, vitiate proceedings because it is an internal document, and no separate prejudice was found from non-supply of the FIR where its contents were already reflected in the original application. However, failure to supply the relied upon documents forming the basis of the reason to believe was held to deny a meaningful opportunity of defence and amount to a violation of natural justice. The Tribunal further held that retention of seized records and freezing of properties cannot continue indefinitely: where the statutory period has expired and no completed investigation or pending prosecution is shown, continuation of restraint is impermissible and the assets and documents must be released.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 10:50:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899417" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 1603 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468361</link>
      <description>Non-supply of an ECIR does not, by itself, vitiate proceedings because it is an internal document, and no separate prejudice was found from non-supply of the FIR where its contents were already reflected in the original application. However, failure to supply the relied upon documents forming the basis of the reason to believe was held to deny a meaningful opportunity of defence and amount to a violation of natural justice. The Tribunal further held that retention of seized records and freezing of properties cannot continue indefinitely: where the statutory period has expired and no completed investigation or pending prosecution is shown, continuation of restraint is impermissible and the assets and documents must be released.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468361</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>