Tribunal overturns Adjudicating Authority's order under PMLA Act

The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order under the PMLA Act. It found the appellant's case similar to a previous case where properties were purchased before the sanctioned loans, and banks were not involved in the offense. The Tribunal criticized the Authority for not considering its judgment and failing to discuss relevant Supreme Court and High Court decisions. It emphasized the necessity of respecting higher authorities' decisions and consulting legal members. The impugned order was stayed until final disposal, stressing the importance of following legal precedents for just decisions under the PMLA Act.

---

---

Issues:
- Appeal against order passed by Adjudicating Authority under PMLA Act
- Non-consideration of Tribunal's judgment by Adjudicating Authority

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed under section 26 of the PMLA Act against the order dated 13.09.2017 passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The appellant's case was found similar to a previous case decided by the Tribunal, where it was established that the attached properties were purchased before the offending loans were sanctioned, and the banks were not involved in the scheduled offense. The Tribunal emphasized that the mortgaged properties, being security for loans, should not be subject to attachment when purchased prior to the events of fund diversion and fraud by the borrowers.

2. The Tribunal expressed concern that its previous judgment was not considered or followed by the Adjudicating Authority, highlighting the importance of respecting higher authorities' decisions. The Authority failed to discuss the judgments of the Supreme Court and High Courts, which were referred to in the Tribunal's decision. It raised a serious issue of non-compliance with judgments from higher courts and the Tribunal, emphasizing the need for consultation with legal members before disregarding such precedents.

3. The Tribunal noted that the member who passed the impugned order was not a judicial member and should have consulted at least the legal member before ignoring judgments from higher authorities. The respondent accepted the notice and requested time to file a reply, which was granted. The appeal was scheduled for final disposal on 15th January, 2018, with the operation of the impugned order stayed in the appellant's case until then.

4. The Tribunal directed the copy of the order to be sent to the Ministry and provided "Dasti" copies to both parties. The issues raised in the appeal highlighted the importance of adherence to legal precedents and the need for proper consideration of judgments from higher authorities to ensure fair and just decisions in matters under the PMLA Act.

---