9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 635X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 decide afresh after hearing both parties and their contentions raised. The same be decided within 180 days from today. All the contentions raised by the appellant shall be considered by the Hon ble Member (Law) who will hear the matter. - MP-PMLA-3640/COCHIN/2017 (Misc.) And FPA-PMLA-898/COCHIN/2015 - - - Dated:- 7-6-2019 - Justice Manmohan Singh Chairman For the Appellant : Dr. Shamsuddin, Advocate, Mr. Atiqur Rehman Kh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 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 therefore stands admitted. The Appellant paid an amount of ₹ 1,00,000/- on the date of Agreement (26.05.2012) and part payment of ₹ 50,000/- was made on 16.05.2013 to Mr. Santosh Kumar. The said amount of ₹ 1,00,000 was paid by availing a gold loan of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... torate, 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 fair market value. The same cannot be termed as proceeds of crime and could not have been attached. 8. It is submitted that the Appellant in his statement dated 11/12.09.2014 was coerced to write that the actual s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tem 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 crime as culmination of these proceedings involved in the criminal liabilities, at least the con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 appeal, the hearing officer was unsure about the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
