Allowed

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017 of M/s. Tejal Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP28 Apr 2017FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal accepted an undertaking by the appellant to deposit part of the dues and refrain from alienating property, granting a stay of the notice issued under section 8(4) of the PMLA requiring possession of the property.

What did the court decide?

Stay of the operation of the notice dated 24th March, 2017, under section 8(4) of the PMLA.

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017 of M/s. Tejal Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v/s… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3395/DLI/2017 (Stay)

¶3

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017

¶4

M/s. Tejal Constructions Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … Respondent

¶5

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶6

For the appellant	: Dr. Anurag Kumar Aggarwal, Advocate
For the respondent	: Shri Nitesh Rana, Advocate
CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH SHRI G.C. MISHRA	: CHAIRMAN : MEMBER
SHRI B.K. BANSAL	: MEMBER
	ORDER 28.04.2017

¶7

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017

¶8

The appellant has challenged the order dated 14^th March, 2017 passed in O.C. 664/2016. Issue notice in the appeal. Mr. Nitesh Rana, advocate accepts the notice on behalf of the respondent. Let the reply be filed within six weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶9

List on 15^th September, 2017.

¶10

MP-PMLA-3395/DLI/2017 (Stay)

¶11

The appellant has filed the application for stay of operation of impugned order alongwith the application the appellant has filed the copy of the notice under section 8(4) dated 24^th March, 2017 seeking the possession of House No. BP-13, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi and Basement, Ground, 1^st & 2^nd Floor, at 13/8, Block A, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi.

¶12

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

The learned counsel for the appellant has not disputed the fact that the entire loan taken by the appellant has not been paid by the appellants. According to him, the sum of Rs. 12,91,79,000/- is till due. His clients were not involved in the schedule offences. They are innocent parties who were always inclined to deposit. The amount is referred in their books of accounts. At this stage they are ready to deposit part of the amount without prejudice to contest the matter on merit as directed by this Tribunal. The attachment is against the settled law. The transactions in question is up to 21^st June 2008. The related provisions of schedule offence was not in operation as on 1^st June, 2009.

¶15

The prayer is opposed by the respondent.

¶16

Since the offer is made on behalf of appellant to deposit atleast 25% of total principal amount due without prejudice. So, it is directed to deposit the sum of Rs. 3.25 Crores by way of Bank Guarantee within six weeks to the satisfaction of the respondent on behalf of his client. Mr. Ashwini, Director of the appellant company gave an undertaking before us that the appellants in both matters shall not dispose of or alienate the property in any manner directly or indirectly till further order. The said order offer is accordingly accepted.

¶17

The said deposit of Rs. 3.25 crores by way of Bank Guarantee to the satisfaction of the respondent shall be made within four weeks from today. The other objections raised by the respondent would also be considered while disposing of the interim application. In the meanwhile six weeks time is granted to the respondent to file the reply.

¶18

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

In view of the said terms, the operation of the notice dated 24^th March, 2017, issued by the respondent under section 8(4) shall remain stayed.

¶21

Copy of the order be given ‘dasti’ to both the parties.

¶22

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶23

(G.C. Mishra) Member

¶24

(B.K. Bansal) Member

¶25

New Delhi,

¶26

28^th April, 2017

¶27

‘d’

¶28

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017

¶29

Page 3 of 3

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017 of M/s. Tejal Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1714/DLI/2017 of M/s. Tejal Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

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