Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + AT Money Laundering - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 1066 - AT - Money LaunderingOffence under PMLA - attachment orders - Held that:- From the entire gamut of the above mentioned three appeals with regard to the two properties which were purchased by S.V. Srinivas for a total sum of ₹ 9,30,000/- which were given by him to his mother and wife. The allegation made against him is that he has declared in the Income tax Return for the period 2007-08 was only ₹ 5,17,888/- whereas the two properties, the declared value is ₹ 9,30,000/-. The appellant has furnished the details in order to show that he has the sufficient amount at the time of purchasing the above mentioned two properties. Taking the face value of the allegation of the respondent without expressing anything, as alleged, he was only having ₹ 5,17,888/- whereas the value of two properties are ₹ 9,30,000/-, in order to strike balance, the difference of the same i.e ₹ 4,12,112/- is directed to be deposited by S.V. Srinivas with the respondent by way of Fixed Deposit Receipt for initial period of two years within four weeks and the same be renewed by S.V. Srinivas until the final order is passed in the prosecution complaint in the name of respondent. As far as the other allegation of the amount spent by him to purchase the property of ₹ 7,00,000/- is concerned, the same is not correct as entire payment was paid by his father, who is the husband of Saraswati ( one of the appellants) . The appellant shall also file an Undertaking by way of affidavit that in case the appellant is finally held guilty in the prosecution complaint, he shall deposit a sum of ₹ 10.0 lac (ten lac only ) with the respondent as the said amount was spent by him for renovation of his father’s property as per alleged allegation made in the prosecution complaint. Once the Fixed Deposit Receipt and Undertaking are filed by the appellant with the respondent within the time granted, the above named two properties shall stand released. The said directions are passed without prejudice and I may also clarify that in case the prosecution complaint is decided in favour of S.V. Srinivas and his wife Reshma, the said amount shall be released to them by the respondent immediately.
|