Partly allowed

FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017 of Mahat Chandra Talukdar v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Guwahati

ATFP18 Apr 2017FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal under the PMLA allowed condonation of a 13-day delay in filing an appeal due to judicial custody and illegal attachment of assets, disposing of the delay application and issuing notice for the merits of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay was disposed of in favour of the appellant. Notice was issued to the respondent for the appeal.

FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017 of Mahat Chandra Talukdar v/s The Joint… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3276/GHY/2017 (COD) MP-PMLA-3277/GHY/2017 (Exp.) FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017

¶3

Mahat Chandra Talukdar … Appellant Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Guwahati … Respondent

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the appellant	: Shri Rajeev Awasthi, Advocate
For the respondent	: Shri Nitesh Rana, Advocate on Behalf of Shri Atul Tripathi, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA	: MEMBER
SHRI ANAND KISHORE	: MEMBER

¶6

ORDER

¶7

18.04.2017

¶8

FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017, MP-PMLA-3276/GHY/2017 (COD) & MP-PMLA-3277/GHY/2017 (Exp.)

¶9

The appellant has filed the appeal under section 26 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 challenging the order dated 28^th September, 2016.

¶10

Alongwith the appeal, the appellant has filed the application for condonation of delay of 13 days. In the application it is sated that the appellant was in judicial custody at the material time. He and was/is family his suffering from illegal action of the respondent whereby the movable and immovable assets are attached. The other reasons are also

¶11

FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017

¶12

Page 1 of 2

¶13

given in para 4 to 7 of the application. Since the delay of only 13 days and looking to the reasons explained, we are inclined to condone such delay. The application is disposed of.

¶14

As far as the appeal is concerned, issue notice to the respondent. The learned counsel for the respondent accepts the notice and seeks time to file the reply. Let the same be filed within six weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶15

List on 29^th August, 2016.

¶16

Both the parties will file the written synopsis on or before the next

¶17

date.

¶18

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶19

(Kaushal Srivastava) Member

¶20

(Anand Kishore) Member

¶21

New Delhi, 18^th April, 2017

¶22

‘d’

¶23

FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017

¶24

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017 of Mahat Chandra Talukdar v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Guwahati

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1706/GHY/2017 of Mahat Chandra Talukdar v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Guwahati

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases