Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (6) TMI 635

her the property attached was involved in money laundering or not and it was acquired from the proceed of crime or not. No doubt, if the property which was acquired is not traceable or disposed of due to misconduct of the accused party, only then other property can be attached in lieu of value thereof, in order to secure the proceeds of crime. However, in the present appeal, the hearing officer was unsure about the same, he had adopted ‘oblique’ system which is not permitted in law. It is evident that due process has not been followed which is mandated in law. If alternative oblique system will continue, the confusion is to continue. The impugned order is set-aside. The matter is remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority to de .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

om Jemini Jacob. The said amount was paid out of the advance amount (₹ 10,00,000) received from Dr. Shibu Jayaraj for which the Appellant sold his land admeasuring 4.05 arcs (approx.405 Sqr. Yards) situated at resy. No/377/2 in Block No. 14 of Ambalapuzha Village. The Agreement dated 16.01.2013 executed between the Appellant and Dr. Shibu Jayaraj is annexed with the Appeal. (ii) The second property of 4.85 arcs (485 Sqr. Yards) situated in Karumady village Ambalapuzha Taluk, Alapuzha District was purchased by the Appellant for an amount ₹ 6,10,000/- from Mr. Santosh Kumar vide Agreement dated 26.05.2012 which is already placed on record as Exhibit:A-11. The said Agreement has not been disputed or challenged by the Respondent and .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

onnection whatsoever with the properties legally owned and purchased by the Appellant, therefore, the findings recorded in the above-mentioned High Court Order (M.F.A No. 11 of 2016: Kavitha G. Pillai vs. The Joint Director, Enforcement Directorate, Cochin) cannot be made binding upon the present Appellant as both the cases are different, the OCs are different, the properties are different and the parties are also different. 7. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that Kavitha Pillai is involved in more than 17 cases registered against her which is evident from Para 3 of the judgment dated 26.07.2017 of the Hon ble High Court of Kerala in M.F.A No. 11 of 2016. The appellant has acquired the properties in bona-fide manner and for a fai .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

issued to the Appellant is also annexed in the Appeal. 11. The statements of the real owner as well as the title holder of item No. 1 property (Jemini Jacob) was not recorded by the Respondent. 12. After hearing both parties and having gone through the record, it appears from the impugned order that the various contentions raised by the appellant have either been ignored or not decided as per law. 13. This tribunal however, does not wish to express any opinion about the merit of the case of appellant as to whether the properties in question are acquired from the proceeds of crime or not, but at the same time, the details of amount mentioned have to be dealt within the impugned order before coming to the conclusion that it was proceeds of cr .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

e the competent court of criminal jurisdiction outside India as the case may be and become final after an order of confiscation is passed under sub-section (5) to sub-section (7) of section 8 or section 58 B or sub section 2A or section 60. 15. This tribunal is of the view that the adjudicating authority is duly bound to specifically come to the final conclusion as to whether the property attached was involved in money laundering or not and it was acquired from the proceed of crime or not. No doubt, if the property which was acquired is not traceable or disposed of due to misconduct of the accused party, only then other property can be attached in lieu of value thereof, in order to secure the proceeds of crime. However, in the present appea .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||