I understand. But, since Naster Claims that the fund wasn't released from OP's bank. OP can provide proof that the fund was released. I know that the bank will never keep the funds. Either they will ask for some proof from the receiver or they will return the fund where it comes from.
I know Naster is lying, but, I guess this is the only way to prove that the OP has released the fund from his bank. Also, OP can ask his bank to make sure if the fund was released or not. I guess he already did. But, I am saying in case he didn't.
Yeah there is no doubt OP should send a proof from his bank account to prove his claim, but there cannot be such case that funds are not released from OP bank. Either transaction havent been done or it is done.
You are wrong about that bank will not ask proof from receiver or they wont return payment. I have had cases like that before. If the amount is sufficent enough then receiver bank may ask where the funds are coming from. It is their obligation by law to ensure there is no money laundering going on. (If your story does not add up or your proof is not good enough for them they may return payment to the sender and close your account)
This is getting a bit offtopic, but I can give you similar example.
I used my personal metal revolut account for gambling. Only income to revolut account was from my other bank accounts. They asked for a proof of funds. (Other bank statements, salary slip and so on) I refused to send any bank statement and sent only crypto exchange statements where they can see my withdrawals to my other bank. They reviewed my docs for 2 weeks (at that time I was still able to use my revolut account).
They became to decision to close my revolut account without any explanation. At that time I had 10k withdrawal from gamling which went to my revolut account, but was marked as "reverted". After 24h I got my funds back to my gambling account.