An appellant sought time to file additional documents in a PMLA appeal. The respondent contended they were not part of the original appeal. The tribunal directed the matter to be listed for further decision.
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-1214/LKW/2016
Siddarth Singh … Appellant Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Lucknow … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : Shri Dharmendra Kumar, C.A. |
|---|---|
| For the respondent | : Shri Vikas Garg, Advocate |
| CORAM | |
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH | : CHAIRMAN |
| SHRI ANAND KISHORE | : MEMBER |
ORDER
09.08.2017
FPA-PMLA-1214/LKW/2016
The learned counsel for the appellant has referred to certain documents during hearing. The counsel for the respondent submits that these documents are not part of the original appeal, therefore those may not be considered. The counsel for the appellant seeks two weeks time to file application for filing the additional documents.
List on 1st December, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Anand Kishore) Member New Delhi, 9th August, 2017 ‘s’
FPA-PMLA-1214/LKW/2016
Page 1 of 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether additional documents submitted during hearing can be considered by the Appellate Tribunal when the respondent opposes their inclusion.
Siddarth Singh
The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Lucknow
Manmohan Singh
Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
13 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
