<?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 (8) TMI 857 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796983</link>
    <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, property traceable to proceeds of scheduled offences remains liable to attachment despite layering or acquisition in another person&#039;s name. Active and knowing participation in fraudulent schemes, receipt of funds from group entities, and use of those funds to acquire assets supported treatment of the assets as proceeds of crime. Claimed commission income did not displace that evidence. Assets held in a spouse&#039;s name were funded by tainted proceeds, while an asserted loan did not explain the remaining consideration or repayment. Continued enjoyment of rental income established beneficial control over nominally transferred property and supported concealment findings. Provisional attachment was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2026 07:18:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=917055" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 857 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796983</link>
      <description>Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, property traceable to proceeds of scheduled offences remains liable to attachment despite layering or acquisition in another person&#039;s name. Active and knowing participation in fraudulent schemes, receipt of funds from group entities, and use of those funds to acquire assets supported treatment of the assets as proceeds of crime. Claimed commission income did not displace that evidence. Assets held in a spouse&#039;s name were funded by tainted proceeds, while an asserted loan did not explain the remaining consideration or repayment. Continued enjoyment of rental income established beneficial control over nominally transferred property and supported concealment findings. Provisional attachment was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796983</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>