Allowed

FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015 of Rose Valley Fashions Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

ATFP30 May 2017FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed an application to replace counsel. New counsel undertook to file the Vakalatnama and reply; failure to comply will lead to dismissal. The appeal was listed for hearing later.

What did the court decide?

The present application to withdraw Vakalatnama is allowed; new counsel to file Vakalatnama and reply within two weeks or appeal likely to be dismissed.

FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015 of Rose Valley Fashions Pvt. Ltd. v/s The… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3519/KOL/2017 (Misc) MP-PMLA-2191/KOL/2015 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015

¶3

Rose Valley Fashions Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata … Respondent

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the Appellant	: Shri Samiron Borkataky, Advocate For M/s I. G. & Associates Shri Mudit Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent	: Shri Vikas Garg, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI B.K. BANSAL	: MEMBER

¶6

ORDER

¶7

30.05.2017

¶8

MP-PMLA-3519/KOL/2017 (Misc), MP-PMLA-2191/KOL/2015 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015

¶9

A fresh application has been filed by the appellant for the withdrawal of the Vakalatnama. Counsel for the respondent submits that it is a delaying tactics on the part of the appellant to drag the proceeding by playing hide and seek policy. As new counsel has appeared before us who undertook to file the Vakalatnama and reply within two weeks, in view of the statement made by the counsel the present application is allowed and the earlier counsel is allowed to withdraw his Vakalatnama. We may clarify here that the Vakalatnama of the New Counsel for the appellant must be filed by the next date. In case the compliance is not made the appeal is likely to be dismissed.

¶10

FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015

¶11

Page 1 of 2

¶12

List this appeal for hearing on 23^rd August, 2017.

¶13

Present counsel as well as the earlier counsel undertook before us to

¶14

inform the appellant about the next date of hearing of the case.

¶15

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶16

(B.K. Bansal) Member

¶17

New Delhi, 30^th May, 2017

¶18

‘AS’

¶19

FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015

¶20

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015 of Rose Valley Fashions Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1099/KOL/2015 of Rose Valley Fashions Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases