TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging PMLA Orders</h1> <h3>M/s. Atlas Jewellery India Limited & Anr, Versus Deputy Director, Directorate Of Enforcement</h3> The court dismissed the writ petition challenging orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The Petitioner ... Maintainability of petition - appropriate Jurisdiction (Appellate Tribunal) - Validity of Provisional Attachment Order - grievance of the Petitioner is that both the orders have been passed under Section 8(3) of the PMLA, in respect of the same property which was earlier retained and has again been attached - HELD THAT:- Upon a query from the Court it is submitted by Mr. Manish, ld. Counsel that since there is a jurisdictional issue for the orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority, the Petitioner did not approach the Appellate Tribunal constituted under PMLA and has preferred to file the present writ petition. In the opinion of this Court, in view of the order dated 8th December, 2022, the present writ petition would not be maintainable as the said order clearly dealt with the same impugned orders which are now sought to be impugned in the present writ petition. Petition dismissed. Issues:Challenge to impugned orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act - Contrary action to law - Jurisdictional issue for orders passed by Adjudicating Authority - Maintainability of present writ petition.Analysis:1. The petition challenged impugned orders dated August 22, 2022, and September 22, 2022, passed by the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in Provisional Attachment Order No. 03/2022 dated April 6, 2022. The orders were issued under Section 8(3) of the PMLA regarding the same property previously retained and reattached, which the Petitioner claimed was against the law.2. The Respondent argued that this was the second round of litigation by the same Petitioner, referring to a previous order granting liberty to approach the Appellate Tribunal under Section 25 of the PMLA. The court noted that the Petitioner had not approached the Appellate Tribunal but filed the present writ petition, raising a jurisdictional issue for the orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority.3. The court observed that the order dated December 8, 2022, had already addressed the impugned orders now challenged in the writ petition. The Petitioner was given liberty in the previous order to approach the Appellate Tribunal, making the present writ petition not maintainable as per the court's opinion.4. The court dismissed the present petition, emphasizing that the merits of the petition were not considered, and the Petitioner was granted liberty to avail remedies in accordance with the law. The court also mentioned that the issue of limitation for any appeal under Section 8(3) would be examined by the Appellate Tribunal if filed by the Petitioner.5. In conclusion, the court found the present writ petition not maintainable due to the previous order addressing the same impugned orders. The dismissal of the petition was based on the Petitioner's failure to approach the Appellate Tribunal as granted in the earlier order, highlighting a jurisdictional issue regarding the Adjudicating Authority's orders under the PMLA.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
