Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2021 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 930 - HC - Money LaunderingMoney Laundering - procedure being followed by the AA for serving the Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) on the parties concerned - HELD THAT - List for further hearing and for conclusion of submissions on behalf of all counsels, on 13th September, 2021 at 2 30 P.M.
Issues:
1. Procedure for serving Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). 2. Responsibility of serving RUDs as per Adjudicating Authority (AA) regulations. 3. Compliance with regulations for serving RUDs by the Complainant or Applicant. 4. Verification of documents shown to the Adjudicating Authority (AA) in a sealed cover. 5. Submission of Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) by email to the Court Master. Analysis: 1. The judgment addresses the issue of the procedure followed by the Adjudicating Authority (AA) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for serving the Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) on the concerned parties. The Registrar of the AA explains that the show cause notice is issued to the noticee with a direction to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to serve all the RUDs to the noticee/Defendants, as per law. Due to a shortage of staff, the RUDs are not directly served by the AA upon the parties concerned. 2. The responsibility of serving the RUDs is highlighted under Regulation 13 of the Adjudicating Authority (Procedure) Regulations, which states that the RUDs are to be served by the Complainant or Applicant. In this case, the ED is responsible for serving the RUDs as the Complainant. 3. The Deputy Director of the ED confirms that upon receiving the show cause notice, the Application under Section 17(4) and specific RUDs were supplied to all parties. However, other documents were not supplied. This raises a concern regarding compliance with regulations for serving all relevant documents to the parties involved. 4. There is an issue raised about the verification of documents shown to the Adjudicating Authority (AA) in a sealed cover, including the order from the Brazilian court. The Deputy Director mentions that the IO dealing with the matter is not available to confirm if the AA was shown these documents. Further verification is required to ensure transparency and compliance with procedures. 5. Lastly, it is noted that the Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) relating to an amended freezing order were submitted by email to the Court Master by the Counsel for the ED. This method of submission is acknowledged and reviewed by the Court, indicating a digital approach to document submission for the case. The judgment concludes by listing the date for further hearing and the conclusion of submissions by all counsels, emphasizing the importance of thorough compliance with procedures and regulations in legal proceedings.
|