The Appellate Tribunal listed the money laundering appeal for evidence, noted the reply had not been filed, granted six weeks for the reply, and directed a rejoinder on the next hearing date.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI
FPA-PMLA-1274/AHD/2016
Shreeji Corporation … Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmadabad … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : Shri Parmatma Singh, Advocate Shri Mayank Jain, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For the respondent | : Shri Atul Tripathi, Advocate |
| CORAM | |
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH | : CHAIRMAN |
| SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA | : MEMBER |
| SHRI ANAND KISHORE | : MEMBER |
ORDER 11.11.2016
FPA-PMLA-1274/AHD/2016
Reply has not been filed by the respondent. One final opportunity is granted to file reply within six weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed by the next date of hearing.
List on 21st March, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Kaushal Srivastava) Member
(Anand Kishore) Member
New Delhi, 11th November, 2016 ‘R’
FPA-PMLA-1274/AHD/2016
Page 1 of 1
Shreeji Corporation
The Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmadabad
Manmohan Singh
Kaushal Srivastava
Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
