AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 707
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....loan amount is to be recovered. 3. The facts of the case as per pleadings are given as under:- (a) 2014 : Smt. Banuben R. Patel, Respondent No. 3, sold proprietorship of Hotel namely Sai Leela, and approached the Bank for LT Mortgage Loan of Rs. 3 Crores for construction of a Hotel Building Project and offered mortgaged of certain immovable properties owned by her and standing in her name on the said date in the Revenue Records. (b) 18.12.2014 : Legal opinion on the basis of Appellant's Bank letter dated 16.12.2011 was received by the Bank. (c ) 27.12.2014 : Valuation Certificate received by the Bank. (d) 20.04.2015 : Loan of Rs. 3 Crores was sanctioned vide No. GSCB/L&A/BOD/2015-16/150/814 repayable on or before 20.02.2016 by 120 instalments of Rs. 2,50,000/- as Principal Amount plus interest thereon. Moratorium Period which included 120 months repayment period. Two Loan Sureties was obtained. Respondent No. 1 and 2 herein as Guarantors. (e ) 21.05.2015 : Loan Agreement signed. First Instalment of Rs. 100,00,000/- was disbursed. (f) 20.06.2015 : Deed of Mortgage was executed and registered between the Bank and the Respondent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Section 120 B IPC and Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Surat. 9. On the basis of allegations mentioned in the charge-sheet. The EIR was recorded vide ECIR /20/STSZO/2017 dated 14.02.2017 under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 by the Enforcement Director against Mr. Ramesh Jaggubhai Patel, this wife Mrs. Bhanuben Patel and others under various sections and accordingly Investigation was initiated under the provisions of PMLA, 2002 to identify the proceeds of crime. 10. On 15.02.2017, the ED seized all Deposit Accounts including mortgaged property in question. 11. On 15.11.2017, Deputy Superintendent of Police, SC/ST Cell, Surat filed supplementary Chargesheet, ACB-61, No. III-119 on 15.03.2017 before the Additional Sessions Judge and invoking Section 66 (1) B, 65-A, 65-E, 116 (2), 81, 83, 97 (G), 98 & 99 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 120-B-465, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 12. 17.07.2017: Accordingly, on the basis of the said Investigation, Appellant's Bank hypothecated / mortgaged property, were at....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecovery of Debts, Loss and Miscellaneous provisions (Amendment) Act, 2016 w.e.f. 01.09.2016. The amending provisions give overriding effect to any other law and propriety to the secured conditions for the time being enforced including the provisions of PMLA in so far as recovery of loan by the secured creditor is concerned. Amended provisions are as under :- (i) Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 : Priority to secured creditors - Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, after the registration of security interest, the debts due to any secured creditor shall be paid in priority over all other debts and all revenues, taxes, cesses and other rates payable to the Central Government or State Government or local authority." Explanation : For the purposes of this section, it is hereby clarified that on or after the commencement of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (31 of 2016), in the cases where of secured assets of the borrower, priority to secured creditors in payment of debt shall be subject to the provisions of that Code.". (ii) Section 31 B of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tters including recently decided in the matter of IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs. Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi in FPA- PMLA-2147/DLI/2018 on 10.05.2018. 22. The relevant portions of the orders passed in aforesaid appeals are re-produced below:- "FPA-PMLA-1026/KOL/2015 7. Coming to the second question, there is no doubt that the 1985 Act is a special Act. Section 32(1) of the said Act reads as follows: "32. Effect of the Act on other laws.-(1) The provisions of this Act and of any rules or schemes made there under shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law except the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (46 of 973) and the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (33 of 1976) for the time being in force or in the Memorandum or Articles of Association of an industrial company or in any other instrument having effect by virtue of any /law other than this Act." 8. The effect of this provision is that the said Act will have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law except to the provisions of the Foreign ExchangeRegulation Act,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ck Companies Act from the ambit of the said Act, the Legislature would have specifically so provided. The fact that the Legislature did not specifically so provide necessarily means that the Legislature intended that the provisions of the said Act were to prevail even over the provisions of the Sick Companies Act. Under Section 3 of the 1992 Act, all properly of notified persons is to stand attached. Under Section 3(4), it is only the Special Court which can give directions to the Custodian in respect of property of the notified party. Similarly, under Section 11(1), the Special Court can give directions regarding property of a notified party. Under Section 11(2), the Special Court is to distribute the assets of the notified party in the manner set out thereunder. Monies payable to the notified parties are assets of the notified party and are, therefore, assets which stand attached. These are assets which have to be collected by the Special Court for the purposes of distribution under Section 11(2). The distribution can only take place provided the assets are first collected. The whole aim of these provisions is to ensure that monies which are siphoned off from hanks and f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1993 wherein after giving an overriding effect to the 1993 Act it is specifically provided that the said Act will be in addition to and not in derogation of a number of other Acts including the 198.5 Act. Similarly under Section 32 of the 1985 Act the applicability of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act is not excluded. It is clear that in the instant case there was no intention of the legislature to permit the 1985 Act to apply, notwithstanding the fact that proceedings in respect of a company may be going on before the BIFR. The 1992 Act is to have an overriding effect notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in another Act." 31. The similar view was taken by the Bombay High Court in the case of Bhoruka Steel Ltd. Vs. Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. The judgment rendered on 09.02.2016 reported in 1997 (89) company cases 547 (BOM) para 15 of the said judgment read as under: 15. To be noted that in both the judgments, relied upon by counsel, the Supreme Court has held that generally where there are two special statues, which contain non-obstante clauses, the later statute must prevail. This is because at the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in force, the rights of secured creditors to realise secured debts due and payable to them by sale of assets over which security interest is created, shall have priority and shall be paid in priority over all other debts and Government dues including revenues, taxes, cesses and other rates due to the Central Government, State Government or local authority." Explanation : For the purposes of this section, it is hereby clarified that on or after the commencement of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (31 of 2016), in cases where insolvency or bankruptcy proceedings are pending in respect of secured assets of the borrower, priority to secured creditors in payment of debt shall be subject to the provisions of that Code." 34. In Section 2 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993after the words "the date of the application","and includes any liability towards debt securities which remains unpaid in full or part after notice of ninety days served upon the borrower by the debenture trustee or any other authority in whose favour security interest is created for the benefit of holders of debt securities or;" is added which makes the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nation. - for the purposes of this section, it is hereby clarified that on or after the commencement of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, in cases where insolvency or bankruptcy proceedings are pending in respect of secured assets of the borrower, priority to secured creditors in payment of debt shall be subject to the provisions of that Code." "3 There is, thus, no doubt that the rights of a secured creditor to realize secured debts due and payable by sale of assets over which security interest is created, would have priority over all debts and Government dues including revenues, taxes, cesses and rates due to the Central Government, State Government or Local Authority. This section introduced in the Central Act is with "notwithstanding" clause and has come into force from 01.09.2016" "4 The law having now come into force, naturally it would govern the rights of the parties in respect of even a lis pending." "5 The aforesaid would, thus, answer question (a) in favour of the financial institution, which is a secured creditor having the benefit of the mortgaged property." 38. In another Madras High Court judgment in the case of "Dr. V. M. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irectly as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence, where a person satisfies the adjudicating authority by relevant material and evidence having a probative value that his acquisition is bona fide, legitimate and for fair market value paid therefor, the adjudicating authority must carefully consider the material and evidence on record (including the Reply furnished by a noticee in response to a notice issue under Section 8(1) and the material or evidence furnished along therewith to establish his earnings, assets or means to justify the bona fides in the acquisition of the property); and if satisfied as to the bona fide acquisition of the property, relieve such property from provisional attachment by declining to pass an order of confirmation of the provisional attachment; either in respect of the whole or such part of the property provisionally attached in respect whereof bona fide acquisition by a person is established, at the stage of the section 8(2) process..." 41. The Supreme Court in (2010)8 Supreme Court Cases 110 (Before G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly, JJ) in the case of United Bank of India V/s. SatyawatiTondon and Ors. In paras no. 6, 55 & 5....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e attached properties are sold and even otherwise. Copy of the settlement of the borrowers and the complainant Bank of India was filed before us. As far as the schedule offence is concerned, we do not wish to make any comment. But we can only observe that in case of settlement, joint petition for quashing of FIR in the High Court u/s 482 Cr. P.C. could be filed. 43. It is not denied on behalf of department that these provisional attachment was made, the proceedings of recovery of amount were pending before the DRT for recovery against the borrowers and for sum of the properties, possession were with the bank. The mortgaged deeds are also not disputed or/and validity of the same are not challenged on behalf of ED. 44. It is settled law that generally when the civil dispute between the parties are settled before the court particularly pertaining to the recovery of out-standing amount, on joint petition, the High Court while exercising its discretion may quash the criminal petition u/s 482 Cr. P.C. at the joint request of the parties. 45. Three Judge Bench in Narendra Lal Jain &Ors., (supra) held that during the investigation pertaining to the culpa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce no force in the submission of respondents that the complainant bank has not exonerated the petitioners, first being the Civil Procedure Code, and the second being the OTS Scheme of the Reserve Bank of India, which the petitioners have extensively referred to in the original petition. The provisions of OTS Scheme prevent the complainant bank from entering into any compromise or settlement under the said OTS Scheme in the cases of willful default, fraud and malfeasance. The complainant bank in choosing to enter into such consent terms under the provisions of OTS Scheme has not only exonerated the petitioners, but for all intents and purposes given up the perusal of the complaint and having no grievance against them in any other proceeding whether civil or criminal on the same set of issues." "70. There is no doubt that the trial has been proceeding for offences for the last about 20 years ago. The dispute between the petitioner and complainant Bank 33 years old. A long time has in fact been elapsed since the alleged commission of offences. Still the trial continues. The present petition is maintainable as the same has been filed also on additional grounds and circumstanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d as under:- "55. Whether innocent party whose properties i.e. movable or immovable are attached can approach the Adjudicating Authority for release of attached property. The Scheme of Prevention of Money Laundering Act clearly provides the mechanism whereby the innocent parties can approach the Adjudicating Authority for the purposes of release of properties which have been attached in terms of the provisions of Section 5 of the Act. This can be seen by reading Section 8(1) and the proviso to Section 8(2) of the Act whereby Adjudicating Authority has to rule whether all or any of the properties referred to in the notice are involved in money laundering or not." "8. Adjudication.- (1) On receipt of a complaint under sub-section (5) of section 5, or applications made under sub-section (4) of section 17 or under subsection (10) of section 18, if the Adjudicating Authority has reason to believe that any person has committed an offence under section 3 or is in possession of proceeds of crime, he may serve a notice of not less than thirty days on such person calling upon him to indicate the sources of his income, earning or assets, out of which or by means of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring Act was not held unconstitutional and ultra virus, but it was observed by the Karnataka High Court that the property of a person can be attached without there being any prosecution for the offence of Money Laundering, but so far as the prosecution of a person for the offence of money laundering is concerned, the proceedings under section 3 of the PML Act can be initiated only in case the person is held guilty of receiving proceeds of crime as a result of commission of scheduled offence. The Karnataka High Court has also held that the complainant in such a case is not required to wait for the result of trial being held for the scheduled offence. A complaint can still be filed against such person, but if ultimately the person is acquitted of the charge for the scheduled offence, his prosecution under section 3 of the Act for the offence of Money-Laundering would also come to an end. It has also been kept open by the Karnataka High Court that a person against whom complaint under section 3 of the PML Act has been filed and he is being prosecuted for the offence of money-laundering, he can show before the court that he is innocent and has not received any proceeds of crime." ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;, makes it luminous that any persons concerned in any process or activity connected with such "proceeds of crime" relating to a "scheduled offence" including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use can be guilty of money laundering, only if both of the two prerequisites are satisfied i.e.- "(i) Firstly, if he- (a) directly or indirectly 'attempts' to indulge, (b) 'knowingly' either assists or is a party, or (c) is 'actually involved' in such activity; and (ii) Secondly, if he also projects or claims it as untainted property;" 38. The first of the two pre-requisite to attract Section 3 of PMLA shall thus satisfy any of the following necessary ingredients- "A. RE: DIRECT OR INDIRECT ATTEMPT: In State of Maharashtra v. Mohd.Yakub, MANU/SC/0239/1980 : (1980) 3 SCC 57, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that- "13. Well then, what is an "attempt"? ...In sum, a person commits the offence of "attempt to commit a particular offence" when (i) he intends to commit that particular offence and (ii) he, having made preparations and with the intention to commit the offence, does an act towards it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cheduled Offences' punishable under Indian Penal Code for direct or indirect involvement, abetment, conspiracy or common intention, nor is any such case made out even on prima facie basis against any of them." 39. The second of the two pre-requisite to attract Section 3 of PMLA would be satisfied only if the person also projects or claims proceeds of crime as untainted property. For making such claim or to project 'proceeds of crime' as untainted, the knowledge of tainted nature i.e. the property being 'proceeds of crime' derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence, would be utmost necessary, which however is lacking in the instant case." 59. These are four ingredients which are determinative factors on the basis of which it can be said that whether any person or any property is involved in money laundering or not. If there is no direct / indirect involvement of any person or property with the proceeds of the crime nor there is any aspect of knowledge in any person with respect to involvement or assistance nor the said person is party to the said transaction, then it cannot be sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent case, one G. Srinivasan is accused of having played fraud and obtained a loan of Rs. 15,00,00,000/- by producing bogus and fabricated documents. From and out of the said amount, the property in question was purchased by him in the names of his Benamies. One Ayyappan was appointed as their Power Agent. One Gunaseelan purchased the property through the Power Agent Ayyappan. The said Gunaseelan was examined and his statement was recorded Under Section 50 of the Act. He had stated that he purchased the property for cultivation. He developed the property but geologist gave opinion that property will not yield proper income. In the circumstances, he sold the property to appellants. The respondent has not produced any document or material to disprove the statement of Gunaseelan. There is nothing on record to show that the transaction in favour of the said Gunaseelan, is not genuine. It is not the case of respondent that the said Gunaseelan is a Benami or employee of G. Srinivasan and that Gunaseelan did not pay any amount as sale consideration or the sale consideration paid by Gunaseelan was not legitimate money. There is no material to show nexus and link of Gunaseelan with G. Sriniv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of Spl. Judge for CBI cases Coimbatore, against Sh. Arivarasu, Sh. R. Manoharan, Sh. R. Selvakumar, Sh. G. Srinivasan, Sh. K. Martha Muthu, Sh. V. InduNesan, Sh. K. Vignesh, Sh. A. Sainthil Kumar, Sh. M. Ram Krishnan, for the offences punishable under Section 120-B read with 420, 467, 471 IPC and section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of PC Act 1988. The offences punishable under section 120-B, 420, 471 are schedule offence under Section 2(1)(y) of the PMLA and therefore on of the condition for issuing provisional attachment order is satisfied. The other important point to be determined is whether the properties attached vide Provisional attachment order are involved in money-laundering. The only defense or explanation raised by Defendants, particularly Def No. 2 to 8 is that the landed properties attached by the complainant are not proceeds of crime. These properties were purchased by these defendants without having any knowledge, whatsoever, that these properties were derived or obtained through criminal activities relating to schedule offence. It has been demonstrated by them that they verified the title deeds relating to the properties and after due verification of every details en....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inancial capacity to buy the property or that the money paid by them as sale consideration was not legitimate money derived by agricultural activities. No material was produced to show that the appellants are close relatives of person, who involved in criminal activities and the person, who sent monies to purchase the property did not possess financial capacity to provide such huge amounts and that they are not genuine purchasers of agricultural products of appellants. The respondent has not made any such investigation and has not produced any such material. Further, the Appellate Authority in fact considered the additional documents produced before it, but rejected the same on the ground that Appellants have not given any valid reasons for not filing the same before the Adjudicating Authority. Having considered the Additional documents, the appellate authority failed to give any finding on merits after verifying with the concerned Bank." 23. It is not denied that the monies have been given for the purchase of the property by the Appellant Bank and not from any tainted source. The money have gone directly from the Bank accounts to the seller and thereafter the mortgage has been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g a provisional attachment order under section 5 of the PMLA, both clauses (a) and (c) of sub-section (1) need to be fulfilled. It is submitted that in the instant case clause (c) is not attracted because the Respondent had no "reason to believe" that the alleged proceeds of crime "are likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which result in frustrating any proceedings relating to confiscation of such proceeds of crime." 28. It is not denied on behalf of the respondent no. 1 that monies of the Banks'/Appellant which are public monies and have been disbursed to the Borrowers are under done under proper sanction, thus under no circumstances, the same can be made to fall within the ambit of section 3 of the PML Act. 29. The amendment made in the SARFAESI Act in 2016, clearly states out the priority which the Secured Creditor shall have over the other dues and Charges. 30. In view of the above made submissions and the above-mentioned case laws passed by this Tribunal which has duly considered the view of various High Courts and the Apex Court on the issue involved wherein it has been held that the Secured Creditor (Bank) are the victims of Conspiracies w....