Comparative Analysis of Attachment of Criminal Properties under different Acts - PMLA Vs. Other Acts

[Commissioner CESTATHyderabad]

In the Indian Legal Frame Work, the Acts like Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities (COFEPOSA) Act, Smugglers And Foreign Exchange Manipulators Act (SAFEMA), Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, and Fugitive Economic Offenders Act etc., were promulgated with the objective to combat offences relating to Smuggling, Narcotics, Terrorism and also envisaged provisions for forfeiture of illegally earned monies through commission of the offence mentioned in the abovementioned Acts.  The relevant provisions are discussed below: 

1.1   Seizure, Freezing and Forfeiture of property under Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, (NDPS Act), 1985:

Money laundering of illicit proceeds gained through Drug related offences would involve three stages viz. placement, layering and integration. In the first stage viz., placement', huge proceeds of drug money is fragmented into small proceeds to avoid currency reporting requirement and deposited in domestic banks and other financial institutions.  In the second stage, that is 'layering', such fragmented funds are moved between multiple financial institutions to conceal or disguise their origin and ownership. This normally involves wire transfer, transfer from front company or shell company and depositing in offshore tax havens.  In the third stage, viz., 'integration', a legitimate explanation for the funds is created via front companies through false invoicing, purchase of financial instruments like stocks, bonds, etc., or investment in real estate, tourism, and other legitimate businesses.

1.1.2    Chapter VA of the NDPS Act, provides for forfeiture of illegally acquired properties by the Drug Traffickers.  This Chapter applies to:

1. A person who has been convicted of an offence punishable under the Act with imprisonment of ten years or more;
2. Every person who has been convicted of a similar offence by a competent court of criminal jurisdiction outside India;
3. Every person in respect of whom an order of detention has been made under the prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act;

Provided that such order of detention has not been revoked on the report of the Advisory Board constituted or such order of detention has not been set aside by a court. 

Procedure:

        Every officer empowered under Section 53 of the Act and officer-in charge of the police station, shall identify the illegally acquired properties.  The officer concerned may issue an order seizing the properties and if it is not possible to seize, may order for freezing the properties.  He is required to send a copy of the order within 48 hours to the competent authority.  The competent authority has to confirm the order within 30days, otherwise, it will be invalid.  The competent authority issues a notice to the affected person and after considering the reply and records of the case, passes an order for forfeiture of the properties or otherwise.  If the person is only arrested, the issue of notice and subsequent forfeiture will proceed only after his conviction or after an order for preventive detention is issued.  The burden of proving that the properties are not illegally acquired is on the accused.  Appeals against the orders of forfeiture can be filed with the Appellate Tribunal for the forfeited properties.  

1.1.3         Offences under the Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, are scheduled offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. On completion of investigation, if it is desired, in deserving cases the investigation report needs to be sent to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for necessary action under the PMLA, 2002.

2.     Conservation of Foreign Exchange Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974:

2.1   COFEPOSA Act, 1974 provide for preventive detention of persons in certain cases for the purposes of conservation and augmentation of foreign exchange and prevention of smuggling activities and for matters connected therewith.

2.1.1     Section 3 of the COFEPOSA Act, empowers the competent officers of the Central and State Governments to detain persons including a foreigner with the view to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to conservation for exchange and prevent him from smuggling goods.

 2.2  Attachment of Properties of Absconders under the COFEPOSA:

Section 7 of the Act stipulated that if the Government has reasons to believe that a person in respect of whom a detention order has been made has absconded or is concealing himself so that the order cannot be executed, the Government may (i) make a report in writing of the fact to a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Magistrate of the First Class having the Jurisdiction in the place where the said person ordinarily resides; and there upon the provisions of Section 82, 83, 84 & 85 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 shall apply in respect of the said person and his property as if the order directing that he be detained were a warrant issued by the Magistrate.  Thus, the provisions provide for attachment of the property of the absconder under Section 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code which provides for attachment of property of person absconding is invoked. 

 2.3   Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators Act, 1976:

This Act provides for the forfeiture of illegally acquired properties of smugglers and foreign exchange manipulators and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.  The Act is applicable to every person, (i) who has been convicted under the Sea Customs Act, 1878, or the Customs Act, 1962 of an offence in respect to goods or (ii) who has been convicted under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and (iii) every person in respect of whom an order of the detention is made under the Conservation of the Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling (COFEPOSA), 1974.  The Act provides that it shall not be lawful for any person to whom this Act applies to hold illegally acquired property either by himself or through any other person on his behalf and where any person holds any illegally acquired property, that property gets forfeited to the Central Government in accordance with the provisions of the act.

2.4   Notice of Forfeiture:

The competent Authority has reason to believe [the reasons for such belief to be recorded in writing], that all or any of such properties are illegally acquired properties, it may serve a notice upon such person [person affected] calling upon him to indicate the sources of his income, earnings or assets out of such or by means of which he has acquired such property and the evidence on which he relies and other relevant information and particulars, and to show cause as to why such properties should not be declared to be illegally acquired properties forfeited to the Central Government. 

2.5   Forfeiture of Property in certain cases (Section 7):

The Competent Authority may after considering explanation to the show cause notice and the materials available before him and after giving to the person affected a reasonable opportunity of being heard, by order, record a finding whether all or any property in question are illegally acquired properties.  Proving that the any properties specified is not illegally acquired property shall be on the person affected. 

3.     Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 read with The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016:

This Act has come into effect originally in the Year 1988, to prevent Benami Transactions.  The said Act has been substantially revised vide amendment No. 43/2016 dt. 10.08.2016 and henceforth this Act is called as the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016.  The mandated Section 3 of the principled Act prescribes that whosoever enters into any benami transaction on and after the date of commencement of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment, shall notwithstanding anything contained in the Sub-Section (2) be punishable in accordance with the provisions contained in Chapter 7 of the Act.  The new Section 5 has been inserted in place of Section 5& 6 stipulating that any property, which is subject matter of Benami Transaction shall be liable to be confiscated by the Central Government.  The Benamidar shall not re-transfer the benami property held by him to the beneficial owner or any other person acting on his behalf.  Where any property is re-transferred in contravention of the Act, the act of the property shall be deemed to be null and void.  

3.1.1    Attachment, Adjudication and Confiscation Procedure:

Where the initiating officer, on the basis of material in his possession has reason to believe that any person is a benamidar in respect of a property, he may after recording his reasons in writing issue a notice to the person to show cause as to why the property should not be treated as benami property.  To prevent alienation of the property during the period specified in the notice, the initiating officer may with the previous approval of the Approving Authority by or in writing may attach the property provisionally for a period not exceeding 90 days from the date of issuance of the notice.  Where the provisional attachment is made, the initiating officer shall pass an order continuing the provisional attachment of the property with the prior approval of the Adjudicating Authority till the passing of the order by the Adjudicating Authority or revoke the provisional attachment of the property with the prior approval of the Adjudicating Authority.  Where the initiating officer passes an order continuing the provisional attachment of the property, he shall within 15 days from the date of the attachment, draw up a statement of the case and refer it to the Adjudicating Authority.  On receipt of a reference, the Adjudicating Authority shall issue a notice to furnish documents and particulars or evidence as is considered as necessary on the following persons namely: (a) the person specified as a benamidar therein (b) any person referred to as the beneficial owner (c) any interested party including a banking company (d) any person who has made a claim in respect of the property after receiving reply.  The Adjudicating Authority after receiving reply to the notice, and taking into account all relevant materials provide an opportunity of being heard to the person specified as a benamidar therein, the initiating officer and any other person who claims to be the owner of the property, and thereafter pass an order – (a) holding the property not to be a Benami Property and revoking the attachment order or (b) holding the property to be a Benami Property confirming the attachment order, in all other cases. 

4.     Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018:

4.1   This Act provides for measures to deter Fugitive Economic Offenders from evading the process of law in India by staying outside the jurisdiction of Indian courts. This Act was enacted on 31^st July, 2018.  As per Section 2(f) of the ‘Fugitive Economic Offender’ means any individual against whom a warrant for arrest in relation to a scheduled offence has been issued by any court in India, who- (i) has left India so as to avoid criminal prosecution and being abroad, refuses to return to India to face criminal prosecution. 

4.1.1   Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 can also be a recourse to attach a property. A person can be named an offender under Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 if there is an arrest warrant against him or her for involvement in economic offences involving at least Rs.100 crore or more and has fled from India to escape legal action. Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 includes an offence of money laundering under sections 3 and 4 of PMLA under its schedule and the ‘proceeds of crime’ held outside the country can be attached directly using it. In order to attach a property located outside the territorial jurisdiction of India, the Investigating Office sends a 'Letter Rogatory' (it is a formal request sent by a competent court in India requesting his counterpart (a competent authority) outside India seeking judicial assistance in investigation.

4.1.2   Section 4 of the Act mandates the Director or any officer not below the rank of Deputy Director authorized by the Director has reasons to believe [the reasons for such belief to be recorded in writing] on the basis of material in his possession, that any individual is a Fugitive Economic Offender, he may file an application in the Special Court that such individual may be declared as a Fugitive Economic Offender.  Such an application shall contain interalia a list of property or the value of such properties believed to be the ‘proceeds of crime’ including any such property outside India for which confiscation is sought; and list of properties or benami properties owned by the individual in India or abroad for which confiscation is sought; and a list of persons who may have an interest in any of the properties listed under clauses above. 

4.1.3   Attachment of Property (Section 5):

The Director or any other officer authorized by the Director not below the rank of the Deputy Director, may, with the permission of the Special Court attach any property mentioned in the application under Section 4 by order in writing in such a manner as may be.

4.1.4   Declaration of Fugitive Economic Offender: 

After hearing the application under Section 4 if the Special Court is satisfied that an individual is a fugitive economic offender, it may, by order declare the individual as a fugitive economic offender for the reasons recorded in writing.  After declaration, the special court may order that the ‘proceeds of crime in India or abroad’, whether or not such property is owned by the economic offender and any other property or benami property in India or abroad owned by the fugitive economic offender stands confiscated. 

4.1.5    It can be seen that the SAFEMA; The NDPS Act, 1985; The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 & 1988 are some of statutes that incorporate provisions for attachment, forfeiture, confiscation of property acquired by the criminals with the monies gained out of commission of criminals activities by way of contravention of the provisions aforesaid Acts. 

However, these Acts could not be implemented to the satisfaction of the authorities in as much as the launderers resorted to new techniques. 

5.     Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002:

5.1   The object of the Act is to prevent money laundering and connected activities and confiscation of “proceeds of crime” and preventing legitimizing of the money earned through illegal and criminal activities relating to scheduled offence through investments in moveable and immoveable properties often involving layering of the money generated through illegal activities, i.e., by inducting and integrating the money with legitimate money. 

5.1.1    The Major acts covered under Schedule  of PMLA, 2002 are as below:

(a) Indian Penal Code, 1860;(b) NDPS Act, 1985:(c) Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967:(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: Customs Act, 1962:(e) Customs Act, 1962: (f) SEBI Act, 1992:(g) Copyright Act, 1957; (h) Trade Marks Act, 1999:(i) Information Technology Act, 2000;(j) Explosive Substances Act, 1908;(k) Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972: Passport Act, 1967:(l) Passport Act, 1967: (m) Environment Protection Act, 1986:(n) Arms Act, 1959.

Part C deals with trans-border crimes, and is a vital step in tackling Money Laundering across International Boundaries.

5.1.2   The category of offences enumerated in Parts A, B and C of the Schedule of the Act elucidate the legislative intent that the several offences and the unlawful gains/wealth derived there from by malfeasant(s) are targeted and confiscated, including from others when the property being the derivative of criminal activity is laundered through one or more layered transactions and finds its way to the ownership, control or possession of non-offenders as well; but in respect of scheduled offences.

5.1.3    As per Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the [1][proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming] it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money laundering.  

5.1.4    The expression "proceeds of crime" under Section 2(1)(u) of PMLA means "any property derived or obtained, directly, or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country-or-abroad" Accordingly, the Enforcement Directorate can attach a property under section 5 of PMLA which is located abroad if it is derived or obtained directly or indirectly as a result of criminal activity relating to scheduled offence.

5.1.5   The Section 2(1)(u) of PMLA underwent expansion vide Finance Act, 2018, as per which the Enforcement Directorate can now alternatively attach property equivalent in value abroad as well in case the proceeds of crime have been taken or held outside the country. This equivalent property would also fall under the purview of 'proceeds of crime' and they would have jurisdiction over it although they might have come into existence much before the commission of the scheduled offence or the enforcement of the PMLA.

5.1.6   Predicate Offence:

The Scheduled Offence is called Predicate Offence and the occurrence of the same is a pre requisite for initiating investigation into the offence of money laundering. Predicate Offences are investigated by agencies such as Police, Customs, SEBI, NCB and CBI, etc. under their respective Acts. Every Scheduled Offence is a Predicate Offence.

5.1.7     Powers of Enforcement Directorate:

 As per Section 48 & 49 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the officers of Directorate of Enforcement have been given powers to investigate the cases of money laundering.  The officers were authorized to initiate proceedings for attachment of property and to launch prosecution in the designated special court for the offence of money laundering. 

6.     Provisional attachment of property derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to Scheduled Offence:

Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act authorizes the proper officer of the Enforcement Directorate to provisionally attach the properties involved in the money laundering.  The said Section authorizes the Director or any other officer not below the rank of Deputy Director or authorized by the[2] Director has reason to believe [such reasons to be recorded in writing], on the basis of material in his possession, that-

(a) any person is in possession of any proceeds of crime and (b) such proceeds of crime or likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which may result in frustrating any proceedings relating to confiscation of such proceeds of crime he may, by an order in writing, provisionally attach such property for a period not exceeding 180 days from the date of the order, in such manner as may be prescribed.

ii)     No such order of attachment shall be made unless, in relation to the scheduled offence, a report has been forwarded to a Magistrate under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

6.1   Adjudication: 

Section 8 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 provides-

for adjudication of applications filed against provisional attachment order issued by the competent officer under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and also the applications made under Sub-Section 4 of Section 17 (pertaining to Seizure) Sub-Section 18 (Search of Persons).

On receipt of a complaint against provisional attachment or application against seizure/freezing of record made by the authorized officers of the Enforcement Directorate, if the Adjudicating Authority, has reason to believe that any person committed an [offence under Section 3 or is in possession of proceeds of crime], it may serve a notice, on such person calling upon him to indicate the sources of his income, earning or assets, out of which he acquired the property attached failing which as to why all such attached properties shall not be declared as properties involved in the offence of money laundering.

Where the Adjudicating Authority decides that any property is involved in money-laundering, he will confirm the attachment of the property or retention of property or [[3]record seized or frozen under Section 17 or Section 18 and record a finding to that effect, whereupon such attachment or retention or freezing of the seized or frozen property] or record shall-

(a) continue during the pendency of the proceedings relating to any [[4]offence under this Act before a court or under the corresponding law of any other country, before the competent court of criminal jurisdiction outside India, as the case may be; and]

(b)[5]becomes final after an order of confiscation is passed.

Where the provisional attachment order has been confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority, the Director or any other officer authorized by him shall take[6] possession of the property attached or frozen.

In cases, where the Adjudicating Authority arrive at the finding that the properties are not involved in money laundering, he shall direct for release of all such properties other than properties involved in money laundering to the person entitled to receive it.  However, the Director or any other officer authorized by him in this behalf may withhold the release of any such property for a period of 90 days if he is of the opinion that such property is relevant for appeal proceedings under the act. 

[7]Where on conclusion of trial of an offence under the Act, the Special Court finds that the offence of money laundering has been committed; it shall order that all such properties involved in money laundering shall stand confiscated.

After an order of confiscation of properties under Section 8 has been passed, the Adjudicating Authority shall direct the release of the records to the person for whom such records are seized. 

However, within said 180 days, if the Adjudicating Authority, by an order, records a finding that properties are not involved in money laundering, the order of provisional attachment shall cease to have effect from the date of such order of the Adjudicating Authority (Section 5 (3)).

The owners of immovable property can enjoy the property during the period of provisional attachment.

7.     Details of confirmed attached properties of the Enforcement Directorate[8], from 01.07.2005 up to 31.03.2018:

Action	1.7.2005 upto 31.03.2012	2012-13	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16	2016-17	2017-18	As on 31.03.2018
No. of cases registered	1437	221	209	178	111	200	148	881
No. of Provisional Attachment Orders (PAOs) issued	131	65	130	166	105	180	196	973
Value of Assets under Attachment (Rs. In crore)	1214.66	2358.1	1773.4	3657.1	2000.7285	11032.28	7432.04	29468.31
No. of PAOs confirmed	108	52	57	138	117	118	179	769
Value of assets under PAO confirmed by Adjudicating Authority (Rs. in crore)	960.77	325.98	1395.4	2150.8	2951.89	9188.63	5086.23	22059.7
No. of Persons Arrested	22	3	7	19	32	31	38	152
No. of Prosecution Complaints filed	38	11	55	69	74	101	103	451

7.1   Confirmed Attached Properties of top 5 states in the descending order as follows:

Sl. No.	Name of the State	Number of confirmed attached properties
1.	United Andhra Pradesh	413
2.	Maharashtra	152
3.	West Bengal	75
4.	Madhya Pradesh	69
5.	Jharkhand	65

7.2           CONFIRMED ATTACHED PROPERTIES LOCATED OUTSIDE INDIA

S.No.	Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) No. & date	Address of Property
1.	07/2010 dt. 12/1/2011	Property No.5, Grand Ridge, Sunbery, Australia

It can be observed that the Enforcement Directorate attached properties worth Rs. 29,468 crores upto 31.03.2018.  This is no mean achievement.

8.     It can be observed that due process of law has been followed for attachment of properties both movable and immovable acquired with criminal money derived out of smuggling activities, drug related crimes and economic offences etc., under the provisions of NDPS Act, 1985, COFEPOSA Act, 1974, SAFEMA Act, 1976, Prohibition of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2016 by the investigating Agencies.  These Acts empowered the competent officers specified therein to attach the properties and all such attached properties are required to be confirmed by a higher competent authority.  The same process is being followed in respect of attachment of properties involved in money laundering under the provisions of PMLA, 2002 by the officer not below the rank of the Deputy Director while issuing provisional attachment order which is valid for 180 days.  However, this period of attachment is at variance in each of the above cited Acts.  Under PMLA, 2002, the provisional attachment order needs to be confirmed by Adjudicating Authority within the 180 days period.  All these Acts would provide for issuing of a notice to the alleged offenders to furnish evidence that these properties are acquired through legitimate sources and the burden of proving that these are legally acquired sources is on accused.  The procedures stipulated mandated adherence to principles of natural justice.  All these Acts including PMLA, would envisage prosecution of the offender apart from confiscation of illegally acquired properties.  However, as the above Acts failed to address the problem of money laundering, specifically and since these are not made specially to combat the evil of money laundering, a separate Act in the lines of FATF recommendations was envisaged by the Government of India.  Accordingly, a specialized law in the form of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, has been enacted to curb the menace of laundering and for confiscation of criminal proceeds.  The Act has been amended from time to time to be in line with the Anti-Money Laundering Laws, across the globe so as to establish compatibility with them.  Accordingly, the major amendments in Money Laundering Act was carried out during the years 2009, 2012 & 2019.

Considering the deterrence already created by the Enforcement Directorate to the law violators and criminals involved in money laundering activities, and taking into consideration the performance of Enforcement Directorate in issuing provisional Attachment orders for attachment of properties acquired with ‘proceeds of crime’ valued Rs. 30,000 crores (approximately) in India as well as abroad, and the speed with which the Directorate obtains overseas information pertaining to the assets of the criminals locate abroad, through Letter of Request (LR’s), it can be said that PMLA is far more superior to other Acts with regard to attachment and confiscation of properties acquired with ‘proceeds of crime’ by the criminals.  

[1]Subs by Money-laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 Act No. 2 of 2013 published in Gazette of India Extra. dt. 04-01-2013. w.e.f. 15.02.2013.

[2]Subs. by Money-laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 Act No. of 2013 published in Gazette of India Extra. dt. 04-01-2013 w.e.f. 15-02-2013. follows:-- (1) Where the Director, or any other officer not below the rank Deputy Director authorised him for the purposes of this section, has reason to believe (the reason for such belief be recorded in writing), the basis of material his possession, that- (a) any person is in possession of any proceeds of crime; (b) such person has been charged of having committed scheduled; (c) such proceeds of crime are likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which may result in frustrating any proceedings relating to confiscation of such proceeds of under this Chapter, he may, by order in writing, provisionally attach such property for a period not exceeding (one hundred and fifty days] from the date of the order, in the manner provided in the Second Schedule to the Income-tax, Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and the Director or the other officer so authorised by him, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be an officer under sub-rule (e) of rule 1 of that Schedule: [Provided that no such order of attachment shall be made unless, in relation to the scheduled offence, a report has been forwarded to a Magistrate under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), or a complaint has been filed by a person, authorised to investigate the offence mentioned in the Schedule, before a Magistrate or court for taking cognizance of the scheduled offence, as the case may be: Provided further that, notwithstanding anything contained in clause (b), any property of any person may be attached under this section if the Director or any other officer not below the rank of Deputy Director authorised by him for the purposes of this section has reason to believe (the reasons for such belief to be recorded in writing), on the basis of material in his possession, that if such property involved in money-laundering is not attached immediately under this Chapter, the non-attachment of the property is likely to frustrate any proceeding under this Act]

[3]Subs. by Money-laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 Act No. 2 of 2013 published in Gazette of India Extra. dt. 04-01-2013 w.e.f. 15-02-2013. Before its substitution as follows:- record seized or frozen under section 17 or section 18 and record a finding to that effect, whereupon such attachment or retention or freeing of the seized or frozen property"

[4]Subs. by Money-laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 Act No. 2 of 2013 published in Gazette of India Extra. dt. 04-01-2019 w.e.f. 15-02-2013 before its substitution as follows:-"offence under this Act before a court or under the corresponding law of any other country, before the competent court of criminal jurisdiction outside India, as the case maybe; and".

[5]Subs. by Money-laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 Act No. 2 of 2013 published in Gazette of India Extra. dt. 04-01-2013 w.e.f. 15-02-2013. Before its substitution as follows:-"become final after the guilt of the person is proved in the trial court and order of such trial court becomes final".

[6]Subs. by Money-laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 Act No. 2 of 2013 published in Gazette of India Extra. dt. 04-01-2013. Before its substitution as follows:- "possession of the attached property".

[7]Subs by Money-laundering (Amendment) Act, 2012 Act No. 2 of 2013 published in Gazette of India Extra. dt. 04-01-2013. Before its substitution as follows (5) Where on conclusion of a trial for any scheduled offence, the person concerned is acquitted, the attachment of property or retention of the seized property or record under sub section (3) and net income, if any, shall cease to have effect.

(6) Where the attachment of any property or retention of the seized property or record becomes final under clause (b) of sub-section (3), the Adjudicating Authority shall, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the person concerned, make an order confiscating such property.

[8] https://enforcementdirectorate.gov.in/

-----

 By L.Venkateswara Rao

Additional Commissioner (AR)

CESTAT, Hyderabad.