2014 (10) TMI 956 - AT - Money Laundering

Admission of additional documents - pleas of the respondent not to take the documents on record and not to consider them - Held that - Considering the documents it is apparent that there cannot be doubt about the genuineness of these documents. The plea of the respondent is that the documents are not relevant. However, this plea of the respondent cannot be accepted. The contention of the applicant is that the properties which have been attached had not been acquired from the proceeds of crime. In these circumstances, the copies of bank accounts and income-tax returns will be relevant and it cannot be inferred at this stage that the applicant has not been able to discharge his burden. The contents of the documents and whether they establish that the applicant did not have proceeds of crime can be inferred only after the documents are taken on record and considered in view of the pleas and contentions of the applicant. Therefore, the pleas of the respondent not to take the documents on record and not to consider them cannot be accepted. For the foregoing reasons the application is allowed and additional documents are taken on record subject to payment of ₹ 2,000/- as cost to the learned counsel for the respondent.

Issues:
1. Application for production of additional documents.
2. Application seeking raising additional grounds.
3. Application for permission to produce additional documents.
4. Time sought to file a reply to the amended grounds of appeal.

Issue 1: Application for Production of Additional Documents
The appellant sought the production of various documents, including income tax returns, bank statements, stock options, and supplementary charge sheets. The appellant contended that due to being in judicial custody and lack of awareness, these documents were not submitted earlier. The respondent opposed the application, arguing that the documents were irrelevant as the property was allegedly acquired from the proceeds of crime. The Tribunal held that the documents were necessary for proper adjudication and allowed the application, subject to a cost of Rs. 2,000 to the respondent's counsel.

Issue 2: Application Seeking Raising Additional Grounds
The appellant filed an application to raise additional grounds, citing lack of details due to being in custody and subsequent filing of appeals. The grounds were raised based on advice from a practicing advocate and additional documents filed by the appellant and his wife. The Tribunal permitted the appellant to raise additional grounds, emphasizing that the legality and validity of the grounds were not to be decided at that stage, subject to a cost of Rs. 2,000 to the respondent.

Issue 3: Application for Permission to Produce Additional Documents
Another application was made to produce additional documents, including a provisional attachment order, complaint, and other judgments. The applicant stated that these documents were not brought to the notice of the counsel due to oversight and mental tension. The Tribunal allowed the application, noting the necessity of considering these documents for the proper determination of the pleas and contentions of the parties.

Issue 4: Time Sought to File a Reply to the Amended Grounds of Appeal
The respondent sought time to file a reply to the amended grounds of appeal and the additional documents now filed, which were not previously submitted before the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal granted four weeks for the filing of the reply and set a date for the next hearing. Additionally, a rejoinder, if any, was to be filed two working days before the scheduled hearing date.

In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed various applications related to the production of additional documents and raising of additional grounds, emphasizing the relevance of the documents for proper adjudication. The Tribunal allowed the applications, subject to costs, and set timelines for filing replies and further proceedings in the matter.

← Previous Next →