<?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>2026 (5) TMI 202 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791000</link>
    <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, provisional attachment may extend to property or its equivalent value where it represents proceeds of crime, even if the scheduled offence provision was inserted after the loan sanction date. Earlier acquisition does not prevent attachment if the property reflects criminal value or retained interest, and settlement with the bank in Lok Adalat does not require release while PMLA proceedings remain pending. Discharge of one co-appellant does not by itself defeat attachment where the source remains unexplained, and attachment is not confined to persons named as accused in the predicate case if the property is connected with laundering activity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 18:26:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 202 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791000</link>
      <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, provisional attachment may extend to property or its equivalent value where it represents proceeds of crime, even if the scheduled offence provision was inserted after the loan sanction date. Earlier acquisition does not prevent attachment if the property reflects criminal value or retained interest, and settlement with the bank in Lok Adalat does not require release while PMLA proceedings remain pending. Discharge of one co-appellant does not by itself defeat attachment where the source remains unexplained, and attachment is not confined to persons named as accused in the predicate case if the property is connected with laundering activity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791000</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>