FPA-PMLA-1590/ MUM/2016 of Tejal Kumar Panchal v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

ATFP7 Feb 2017FPA-PMLA-1590/ MUM/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal listed an application for condonation of delay filed by the appellant in an appeal under the PMLA, 2002, for consideration on 17th April, 2017, while noting the need for a reply within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Listed the application for condonation of delay for hearing on 17th April, 2017.

What the court decided

FPA-PMLA-1590/ MUM/2016 of Tejal Kumar Panchal v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3015/MUM/2016 (COD) MP-PMLA-3016/MUM/2016 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1590/ MUM/2016

¶3

Tejal Kumar Panchal … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director … Respondent Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the appellant : Sh. K.K. Maurya, Advocate For the respondent : Sh. Neeraj Atri, Advocate

¶6

CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA	: MEMBER
SHRI ANAND KISHORE	: MEMBER

¶7

ORDER 07.02.2017

¶8

MP-PMLA-3015/MUM/2016 (COD)

¶9

The appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 19^th August, 2015by filing the appeal under section 26 of the PML Act, 2002. Along with the appeal the application for condonation of delay of 443 days has been filed which is opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent. Let the reply to the said application be filed at the first instance within four weeks with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder four weeks thereafter.

¶10

FPA-PMLA-1590/MUM/2016

¶11

Page 1 of 2

¶12

List the application for condonation of delay for consideration on

¶13

17^th April, 2017.

¶14

The notice in the main appeal, if required, would be issued once

¶15

the condonation of delay application is decided.

¶16

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶17

(Kaushal Srivastava) Member

¶18

(Anand Kishore) Member

¶19

New Delhi,

¶20

7^th February, 2017

¶21

‘R’

¶22

FPA-PMLA-1590/MUM/2016

¶23

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1590/ MUM/2016 of Tejal Kumar Panchal v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

FPA-PMLA-1590/ MUM/2016 of Tejal Kumar Panchal v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases