List of 12 appeals under FEMA, FEMA, PMLA. Single Member Appellate Tribunal granted two weeks extension for prosecution costs despite previous dismissal for default.
Grant of 2 weeks time for payment of Rs. 5,000/- prosecution costs; listing fixed for 29th August, 2018.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS, PBPT ACT AT NEW DELHI
| 1. FPA-PMLA-1222/KOL/2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rose Valley Real Estate & Constructions Ltd. | … | Appellant |
| 2. FPA-PMLA-1223/KOL/2016 Real Estate and Land Bank India Ltd. |
… | Appellant |
| 3. FPA-PMLA-1224/KOL/2016 Rose Valley Industries Ltd. |
… | Appellant |
| 4. FPA-PMLA-1225/KOL/2016 | ||
| Rose Valley Marketing India Ltd. | … | Appellant |
| 5. FPA-PMLA-1226/KOL/2016 Gautam Kundu |
… | Appellant |
| 6. FPA-PMLA-1227/KOL/2016 Chocotale Hotles Pvt. Ltd. |
… | Appellant |
| 7. FPA-PMLA-1228/KOL/2016 Idea Project Ltd. |
… | Appellant |
| 8. FPA-PMLA-1229/KOL/2016 Modern Investment Traders Ltd. |
… | Appellant |
| 9. FPA-PMLA-1230/KOL/2016 Brand Value Communication Ltd. |
… | Appellant |
| 10. FPA-PMLA-1231/KOL/2016 Rose Valley Hotels & Entertainments Ltd. |
… | Appellant |
| 11. FPA-PMLA-1232/KOL/2016 |
||
| Rose Valley Realcon Ltd. | … | Appellant |
| & | ||
| 12. FPA-PMLA-1233/KOL/2016 Shibamay Dutta |
… | Appellant |
| Versus | ||
| The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata |
… | Respondent |
| Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appea | red | |
| For the Appellants : Shri Mudi |
t Gup | ta, Advocate |
| For the Respondent : Shri Vikas |
Garg | , Advocate |
FPA-PMLA-1222-1233/KOL/2016
Page 1 of 2
CORAM SMT. ANANYA RAY : MEMBER
ORDER 20.07.2018
FPA-PMLA-1222-1233/KOL/2016
The Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 02.02.2018 has allowed the restoration of application of all the appeals as listed above subject to the condition that a cost of Rs. 5,000/- shall be paid to the respondent on or before the next date of hearing in each of the appeals. The learned counsel for the appellant states that they have been unable to pay the same and seeks further time of two weeks on instructions. The learned counsel for the respondent strongly objects and states that the conduct of the appellant has not been above board. The very fact that the appeal was dismissed for non-appearance and non-prosecution shows that the appellants are not interested in pursuing the appeals. Notwithstanding that the Appellate Tribunal had allowed the restoration but inspite of that the conditions subject to which the appeals were allowed have as yet not been fulfilled, although a period of five months have been lapsed.
In the interest of justice, I am inclined to give a further period of two weeks subject to the condition that a further cost of Rs. 5,000/-, all of which be paid in each of the appeals, within the next two weeks from today. List on 29th August, 2018.
(Ananya Ray) Member
New Delhi, 20th July, 2018
‘A’
FPA-PMLA-1222-1233/KOL/2016
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellants are entitled to further time to pay the required prosecution costs despite previous dismissal for non-prosecution?
Rose Valley Real Estate & Constructions Ltd. and Ors.
The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata
Ananya Ray
As recorded by the court registry
6 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
