Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD /2017 of Biotor Industries Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmadabad

ATFP28 Aug 2017FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD /2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal admitted two separate appeals under the PMLA, 2002: a regular appeal and a stay application. It granted a six-week period for the respondent to file a reply, with the appellant to file a rejoinder within four weeks thereafter, for both matters. Both were listed for future hearing.

What did the court decide?

Six weeks time granted to respondent to file reply in both appeals; appellant allowed to file rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD /2017 of Biotor Industries Ltd. v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3771/AHD/2017 (Stay) &

¶3

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD /2017

¶4

Biotor Industries Ltd. … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmadabad … Respondent

¶5

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶6

For the appellant : Shri Pavan Narang, Advocate Shri Abhishek Anand, Advocate For the respondent : Shri Vikas Garg, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN

¶7

ORDER 28.08.2017

¶8

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD /2017

¶9

The fresh appeal has been filed under section 26 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the order dated 12^th July, 2017. Issue notice to the respondent. Mr. Vikas Garg, learned counsel for the respondent accepts the notice. He seeks six weeks time to file the reply. 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.

¶10

List this appeal on 2^nd February, 2018.

¶11

MP-PMLA-3771/AHD/2017 (Stay)

¶12

Alongwith the appeal the application for stay of the operation of the impugned order has been filed in view of the receipt notice under section 8(4) of the Act. In para 10 of the application it is specifically mentioned

¶13

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD/2017

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

that the property in this para are mortgaged with the bank. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that in view of the such situation the appellant cannot dealt with the property whatsoever. Under these circumstances, no coercive action shall be taken by the respondent in view of notice issued u/s 8(4) of the PMLA, 2002.

¶16

Liberty is granted to the respondent to file the reply within six weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶17

List on 2^nd February, 2018.

¶18

‘Dasti’ to the parties.

¶19

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶20

New Delhi, 28^th August, 2017. ‘d’

¶21

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD/2017

¶22

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD /2017 of Biotor Industries Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmadabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1909/AHD /2017 of Biotor Industries Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmadabad

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