Allowed

FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017 of Smt. Abhilasha Agarwal v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP25 Aug 2017FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellate tribunal disposed of an appeal against an impugned order under PMLA. A stay was granted on the notice u/s 8(4) condensation on the deposit of Rs. 50,000 per month as user/occupation charges for verification of property value.

What did the court decide?

Stay on operation of notice u/s 8(4) subject to deposit of Rs. 50,000 per month by the 7th of each month as user and occupation charges.

FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017 of Smt. Abhilasha Agarwal v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3751/DLI/2017 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017

¶3

Smt. Abhilasha Agarwal … Appellant/Applicant

¶4

Versus

¶5

The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

¶6

… Respondent

¶7

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶8

For the appellant	: Shri M. Datta, Advocate Mr. Vivek Malik, Advocate
For the respondent	: Shri N.K. Matta, Advocate
CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI G.C. MISHRA	: MEMBER

¶9

ORDER 25.08.2017

¶10

MP-PMLA-3751/DLI/2017 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017

¶11

The present appeal has been filed by appellant u/s 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the order dated 16^th June, 2017 passed by the Adjudicating Authority in O.C. No. 702/2017.

¶12

Alongwith the appeal an application for stay has also been filed. The appellant has received a notice u/s 8(4) in relation to the attached property i.e. S-474, Greater Kailash_II, New Delhi-110084, which is registered in the name of appellant. We have heard both the parties.

¶13

Issue notice. Mr. N.K. Matta, Advocate, counsel for the respondent accepts the notice and seeks time to file the reply. Let the same be filed FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017 Page 1 of 3

¶14

within six weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶15

The counsel for the appellant is also pressing for interim order. He has referred number of documents and relied on various documents as well as the Provisional Attachment Order. At this stage, we are of the view atleast the appellant should be deposited user and occupation charges in order to maintain the balance in the matter till the disposal of the appeal.

¶16

The counsel for the appellant has informed us that the market value of the said property is about 25 to 30 thousand. The learned counsel for respondent is refuted the contentions of the appellant’s counsel. He is submitted that it is a double storey house in posh area and its rent must be more than two lakhs. Counsel for appellant submits that the property was purchased much prior to the date of scheduled offences are incorporated in the PMLA- 2002.

¶17

The respondent is allowed to verify the market value of the said property and file the report alongwith the reply.

¶18

The appellant has undertaken that she will not dispose of, alienate or create any third party rights in said property till the pendency of the appeal. In view of the said undertaking, at this stage, we are of the view, that the operation of notice u/s 8(4) is stayed subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit Rs. 50,000/- (fifty thousand only) per month with the respondent from the date of confirmation of the impugned order. The arrears shall be deposited within four weeks from today. The appellant from the month of September keep on depositing the amount mentioned above with the respondent every month by 7^th day of the calendar till the order is confirmed/modified. The order is passed without prejudice.

¶19

FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

List on 1^st February, 2018.

¶22

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶23

(G.C. Mishra) Member

¶24

New Delhi 25^th August, 2017

¶25

‘s’

¶26

FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017

¶27

Page 3 of 3

FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017 of Smt. Abhilasha Agarwal v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1873/DLI/2017 of Smt. Abhilasha Agarwal 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