<?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 (6) TMI 116 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792735</link>
    <description>Receipt and retention of enhanced compensation, obtained through reliance on unrelated proceedings and incorrect judicial references, was treated as money-laundering because the amounts were projected as lawful compensation. The Tribunal also held that &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; is wide enough to cover equivalent-value property where tainted assets are not traceable or have been dissipated, so ancestral or pre-existing properties could be provisionally attached on that basis. It further found the Section 5(1) threshold satisfied where material showed possession of proceeds of crime and a reasonable likelihood of concealment, transfer, or other dealings frustrating confiscation. The provisional attachment was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2026 08:50:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 116 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792735</link>
      <description>Receipt and retention of enhanced compensation, obtained through reliance on unrelated proceedings and incorrect judicial references, was treated as money-laundering because the amounts were projected as lawful compensation. The Tribunal also held that &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; is wide enough to cover equivalent-value property where tainted assets are not traceable or have been dissipated, so ancestral or pre-existing properties could be provisionally attached on that basis. It further found the Section 5(1) threshold satisfied where material showed possession of proceeds of crime and a reasonable likelihood of concealment, transfer, or other dealings frustrating confiscation. The provisional attachment was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792735</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>