Disposed

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017 of M/s. Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore & Ors.

ATFP5 Dec 2018FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017, the appellants challenged the requirement of recording separate reasons to believe under the PMLA. The tribunal adjourned to inspect the file from the Adjudicating Authority and summoned relevant records for the next hearing.

What did the court decide?

Respondent to produce file; record from Adjudicating Authority summoned.

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017 of M/s. Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2018)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-4147/BNG/2017 (Stay) &

¶3

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017

¶4

M/s. Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore & Ors. … Respondents

¶5

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶6

For the Appellant	:	Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Omar Ahmad & Mr. Arjun Dewan Advocates
For the Respondent No. 1	:	Mr. Atul Tripathi, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	:	CHAIRMAN
SHRI G. C. MISHRA	:	MEMBER

¶7

ORDER 05.12.2018

¶8

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017

¶9

Learned counsel for the respondent seeks some time to file the written synopsis.Let the same be filed by the next date of hearing.

¶10

Mr. Rajeev Nayar, Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and make his submission for some time. One argument of the appellant is that it was mandatory for the respondent no. 1 to pass reasons in the order while exercising u/s 5(1) & 8(1) and section 8 of the PMLA, 2002. Counsel for the appellant has referred the 345 internal page of the documents filed by the appellant which would show the show cause notice issued by the respondent dated 15^th March, 2018 u/s 8 of PMLA, 2002. He also submits that it is a printed notice, no separate reasons to believe has been recorded by the Adjudicating Authority.

¶11

Page 1 of 2

¶12

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017

¶13

Mr. Atul Tripathi, counsel for the respondent submits that according to the judgment of Brizo Reality, P.A.O as well as O.C. is completely sufficient material for reasons to believe.

¶14

Under these circumstance, we are of the view that respondent shall produce the file on the next date of hearing with regard to the action initiated, under section 5 of the PMLA, by the respondent. The record from the Adjudicating Authority shall also be summoned for the next date of hearing.

¶15

List on 15^th & 16^th January, 2019.

¶16

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶17

(G. C. Mishra)

¶18

Member

¶19

New Delhi, 05^th December, 2018

¶20

‘S’

¶21

Page 2 of 2

¶22

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017 of M/s. Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-2120/BNG/2017 of M/s. Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Bangalore & Ors.

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