<?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 (7) TMI 163 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794277</link>
    <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, property of equivalent value may be provisionally attached where proceeds of crime are not traceable, even if the asset was acquired before the crime period. The Tribunal relied on the broad construction of &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; and rejected the objection based on pre-crime acquisition. It also found no basis to interfere with the confirmed attachment because the criminal case was still pending, there was no discharge or acquittal, and the material linked the appellant to the alleged smuggling activity. The attachment order was upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2026 08:49:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=909842" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 163 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794277</link>
      <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, property of equivalent value may be provisionally attached where proceeds of crime are not traceable, even if the asset was acquired before the crime period. The Tribunal relied on the broad construction of &quot;proceeds of crime&quot; and rejected the objection based on pre-crime acquisition. It also found no basis to interfere with the confirmed attachment because the criminal case was still pending, there was no discharge or acquittal, and the material linked the appellant to the alleged smuggling activity. The attachment order was upheld and the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794277</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>