Allowed

FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017 of Churchill Alemao & Anr. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Goa

ATFP31 Oct 2017FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellate Tribunal heard stay applications regarding money laundering proceedings involving property attachment and show cause notices. It stayed the operation of notices under Section 8(4) and attachment orders upon appellant's undertaking not to dispose of the flats.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the operation of notice under Section 8(4) regarding flats 8 to 15 and the impugned attachment order pending appeal, subject to appellant's undertaking not to sell or dispose of said flats.

FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017 of Churchill Alemao & Anr. v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3875/GOA/2017 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017

¶3

Churchill Alemao & Anr.

¶4

… Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Goa

¶7

… Respondent

¶8

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶9

For the appellant	:	Shri P.K. Dey, Advocate Shri Shreyashi Chakrabarty, Adv
For the respondent	:	Mr. Vikas Garg, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	:	CHAIRMAN
SHRI G.C. MISHRA	:	MEMBER

¶10

ORDER 31.10.2017

¶11

MP-PMLA-3875/GOA/2017 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017

¶12

The above mentioned appeal has been filed under Section 26 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the order dated 10^th August, 2017. Issue notice to respondent to file the reply. The counsel for the respondent accepts the notice. Let the reply be filed within six week. Rejoinder would be filed four weeks thereafter.

¶13

List on 12^th April, 2018.

¶14

Alongwith the appeal the interim application has also been filed. The learned counsel for the appellant is pressing for interim order as according to him notice is under Section 8(4) has been received in relation to Property No. 8 to Property No. 15 mentioned in the impugned order, the detail is available at page no. 3-5 of the impugned order which are at page no. 54-56 of the appeal (Part-1). The counsel for the appellant submits that the allegation against the appellant for gratification amount of Rs. 75 lakh was for the period of the year 2010-11. The flats were purchased much prior to the said period by way of registered document in the year 2007-2008. He has referred the Show Cause Notice dated 2^nd FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017 Page 1 of 2

¶15

May, 2017 after passing the provisional attachment order. According to him no proper investigation has been done in the matter. Otherwise, the real facts would have been brought on record. The relevant position of the show cause notice read as under:

¶16

As the Adjudicating Authority has reasons to believe that you have committed an offence under Section 3 of PMLA or are in possession of proceeds of crime, the proceed of crime being the property derived or obtained as a result of criminal activities relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property, you are called upon to indicate the sourer of your income earning or assets out of which or by means of which you have acquired the Properties attached under sub-section (1) of section 5 of the prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002, the evidence on which you rely and other relevant information and particulars and show cause why all or any of such Properties should not be declared to be the properties involved in money laundering and be confiscated by the Central Government and why the attachment order should not be confirmed.

¶17

He submits that the proper reply was given but nothing was discussed in the impugned order. He submits that the appellant undertakes not to sell or dispose of these flats till further order passed by this Appellate Tribunal. Issue notice to the respondent to file the reply. Let the reply be filed within six weeks. Rejoinder be filed within four weeks thereafter.

¶18

List this application also on 12^th April, 2018.

¶19

In view of the undertaking given by the appellant not to sell or not to dispose of the said flats, the operation of the notice under Section 8(4) in relation to the 8 flats mentioned as item no. 8 to 15 (the detail is available at page no. 54-56) and the impugned order shall remain stayed.

¶20

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

¶21

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶22

(G.C. Mishra) Member New Delhi, 31^st October, 2017 ‘K’ FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017

¶23

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017 of Churchill Alemao & Anr. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Goa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1975/GOA/2017 of Churchill Alemao & Anr. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Goa

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