Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017 of M/s Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore

ATFP1 Jun 2017FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bencher of Appellate Tribunal disposed of an appeal regarding time limits and maintainability under Section 26 of the PMLA, postponing the hearing on maintainability and directing supply of documents.

What did the court decide?

Documents supplied by 02.06.2017; maintainability and reply filing dates deferred to later hearing.

What the court decided

FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017 of M/s Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3502/BNG/2017 (Stay) MP-PMLA-3503/BNG/2017 (Exp) FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017

¶3

M/s Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd.

¶4

… Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore … Respondent

¶7

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶8

For the Appellant	: Mr. Rajiv Nayyar, Senior Advocate Mr. Omar Ahmad, Advocate Mr. Arjun Dewan, Advocate Mr. Kamaljeet Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent	: Mr. S. A. Saud, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI B. K. BANSAL	: MEMBER

¶9

ORDER 01.06.2017

¶10

FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017

¶11

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 26

¶12

of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the order dated 19^th May, 2017. Admittedly, the time limit of 180 days for decision by the Adjudicating Authority is expiring on 15^th July, 2017. The main grievance of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the documents mentioned in Para 3 at Sr. No. (e), (f) and (q) of the appeal have not been received by the appellant. Therefore, the reply could not be filed. He submits that in case these documents are supplied, the reply would be filed within two weeks. As far as supply of documents is concerned, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent agrees to supply the same by 02^nd June, 2017. However, Mr. S. A. Saud learned Counsel for the respondent submits that issue of maintainability of the appeal may be considered by

¶13

FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

this Tribunal in due course being important issue is involved in many matters. We agree with his submission. Let the document be supplied by 02^nd June, 2017, thereafter the appellant would file the reply before the Adjudicating Authority within two weeks. The matter may be heard by the Adjudicating Authority on or before 05^th July, 2017. The information about fixing the date would be conveyed by the Adjudicating Authority by personally or by E-mail. The date fixed by the Adjudicating Authority on 06^th June, 2017 is cancelled.

¶16

As far as the objection raised by the learned Counsel for the respondent about the maintainability of the appeal, the counsel submits that he would be filing the reply/written synopsis if so required within six weeks. With the concurrence of both the parties, we keep this question open.

¶17

List the appeal on 28^th August, 2017 on this aspect.

¶18

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

¶19

Appellant is directed to serve the copy of this order to the Adjudicating Authority.

¶20

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶21

(B. K. Bansal) Member

New Delhi,

01^st June, 2017

‘AS’

FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017

¶26

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017 of M/s Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

FPA-PMLA-1793/BNG/2017 of M/s Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore

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