Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + AT Money Laundering - 2019 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 130 - AT - Money LaunderingMoney Laundering - financial misdeeds involving huge magnitude of government largesse, corporate dealings including huge investments as part of Quid Pro Quo arrangements for the largesse - maintenance of buffer zone - proceeds of crime - offences under Section 120-B and 420 of IPC - main issues raised by the appellants have not been dealt by the respondent, and CBI in its charge-sheet has ignored the vital facts of the case - HELD THAT:- As per the Concession Agreement, the Appellant was not required to maintain any buffer zone around the Pharma City. The appellant was only required to maintain green belt in accordance with the ‘Guidelines for Development of Greenbelts’ published by CPCB in March 2000 (Please refer Clause H8 of Schedule H of the Concession Agreement), which did not prescribe maintenance of any buffer zone around the Pharma City - It is stated that since there was a possibility of residential areas coming up along the boundary of the Pharma City, the APPCB suggested that a control area be provided outside the Pharma City prohibiting residential areas and polluting industries upto a distance of 1kilometre. The same is evidenced by the letter dated 12.02.2004 written by APIIC to the Vice Chairman VUDA requesting him not to give permissions for any residential layouts around the pharma City. Ramky shall maintain 50 mts. inward as buffer zone inside the pharma till the disputes is finally decided by the Special Court. The attachment in this regard shall continue unless it is vacated by the Special Court. The remaining all attached properties are released forthwith. Burden of proof - HELD THAT:- Unless the charges are framed with the offence of money laundering under Section-3 of the Act, the burden of proof shall remain lies with the respondent to prove that the concerned parties are involved with the offence of money laundering in order to invoke Section-3 of the Act if the properties were acquired from the proceed of crime. This Tribunal is of the opinion that there are many issues raised by the appellants either to have been ignored or not decided as per law. Thus, appeals are partly allowed by modifying both impugned orders until the final decision is given by the Special Court on merit or the charge-sheet is quashed by the court prior to start of trial or otherwise - appeal allowed in part.
|