Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1231/KOL/2016 of Rose Valley Hotels & Entertainments Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

ATFP20 Jul 2018FPA-PMLA-1231/KOL/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal granted a two-week extension for 12 appellants to pay restoration costs of Rs. 5,000/each following failure to meet earlier conditions, adjourning until 29th August 2018.

What did the court decide?

Further period of two weeks granted for payment of total costs of Rs. 5,000/ each; list on 29th August 2018.

FPA-PMLA-1231/KOL/2016 of Rose Valley Hotels… — Company and Corporate | ATFP (2018)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS, PBPT ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

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

¶3

FPA-PMLA-1222-1233/KOL/2016

¶4

Page 1 of 2

¶5

CORAM SMT. ANANYA RAY : MEMBER

¶6

ORDER 20.07.2018

¶7

FPA-PMLA-1222-1233/KOL/2016

¶8

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.

¶9

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 29^th August, 2018.

¶10

(Ananya Ray) Member

¶11

New Delhi, 20^th July, 2018

¶12

‘A’

¶13

FPA-PMLA-1222-1233/KOL/2016

¶14

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1231/KOL/2016 of Rose Valley Hotels & Entertainments Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1231/KOL/2016 of Rose Valley Hotels & Entertainments Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases