The Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property granted a one-week extension to the appellant to file affidavits regarding jewellery seized at marriage, while the application was pending.
Liberty granted to file affidavit of relatives regarding seized jewellery within one week.
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 FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY NEW DELHI
(Under Section 12 of SAFEMA, 1976 as Amended by Finance Act, 2016)
MP-47/BOM/2014 (Rest.) FPA-16/BOM/2007
Yogesh D. Mehta
… Appellant/Applicant
Versus
The Competent Authority, Mumbai
… Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the appellant : Ms. Asmita A. Nayak, Advocate For the respondent : Shri Stanly Joseph, I.O.
CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA : MEMBER SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER
ORDER 11.04.2017
MP-47/BOM/2014 (Rest.) & FPA-16/BOM/2007
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant seeks
one week time to file the affidavit of the relatives who have given the 24 items out of 28 items of jewellery at the time of marriage. These affidavits were not filed before the Competent Authority. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the Appellant would be filing the application also to bring on record the said affidavits. Copies handed over to the other side. In the meanwhile, liberty is granted to the applicant to file the application, if so desired.
List on 8th August, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Kaushal Srivastava) Member
(Anand Kishore)
Member
New Delhi,
11th April, 2017
‘d’
FPA-16/BOM/2007
Page 1 of 1
Yogesh D. Mehta
The Competent Authority, Mumbai
Manmohan Singh
Kaushal Srivastava
Anand Kishore
7 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
