TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 36
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thority. 2. The complainant has issued provisional attachment order no. 01/2012 dated 30.09.2012 under section 5(1) of the PMLA attaching the property of the appellant comprising of :- i) Office No. 507, Shakuntla Building, 59, Nehru Place, New Delhi (herein referred as „the said property). ii) Account no. 629401139789 of the appellant with ICICI Bank, Nehru Place, Delhi having made cash deposit of Rs. 20,000/- after 1st March, 2007. 3. On 16.9.2009, CBI received a complaint from State Bank of India, Sansad Marg, New Delhi alleging the commission of criminal offences by Dr. Kewal Krishan Sood, Promoter of M/s. Raghubir Hospital Pvt. Ltd. and consequently an FIR NO. BD1/2009/E/0019 was registered by the CBI. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Raghubir Hospital Pvt. Ltd. 9. As the commission of offences mentioned in the charge sheet filed by the CBI are scheduled offences under PMLA, the complainant have registered an ECIR no. ECIR/11/DZ/2011/DD(SC)/VM on 28.11.2011 in the Delhi Zonal Office u/s 3 & 4 of PMLA. 10. On 04.08.2012, the complainant has recorded the statement of Dr. Kewal Krishan Sood u/s 50 of PMLA, in pursuance to the order dated 21.07.2012 of CMM as Dr. Kewal Krishan Sood was in judicial custody in Central Jail, Tihar, New Delhi. 11. Dr. K.K. Sood, inter alia stated that in the year 2003-2004, he had taken land for M/s. Raghubir Hospital Pvt. Ltd. because GDA had passed a resolution that no Nursing Home/ Hospital will be run in the residential area; that h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt 15. The entire case of the complainant rests upon complaint u/s 5(5) of PMLA in ECIR No. ECIR/11/DZ/2011/AD (VM) filed consequent to provisional attachment order alleging that the appellant had contravened the provision of Section 3 of the PMLA and thus, „the said property‟ is liable to be attached. 16. The complainant has also issued summon to the appellant and statement of Shri V.K. Gupta, Company Secretary (now appellant) was recorded u/s 50 of the PMLA and the appellant inter alia stated that for purchase of „the said property‟ in his name at Nehru Place, the payment was made from ABN Amro Bank and State Bank of Patiala, Nehru Pace, New Delhi; that a sum of Rs. 35 lacs was paid for the purchase of the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LA. 19. It was further alleged that the appellant has invested part of total of Rs. 70 Lacs in cash which he received from Dr. Kewal Krishan Sood for purchase of „the said property‟ and rest of the amount was deposited in the bank account no. 629401139789 of appellant maintained with ICICI Bank, Nehru Place, New Delhi in different instalments and thus, the appellant has committed an offence u/s 3 of PMLA. 20. The appellant has filed the detailed reply to the notice issued by the adjudicating authority denying the allegations made by the complainant along with all the relevant documents providing sources of income from which the above mentioned property has been acquired by the appellant. 21. Admittedly, in the prosecuti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ings and loans. The same has not been rebutted by the respondent and no adverse observation has been made by the adjudicating authority. So it may stand proved that the property attached by the complainant has not been purchased by any cash. 25. It is true that the complainant has made the allegation that Dr. K.K. Sood paid a sum of Rs. 70 lakh in cash to the appellant after getting the loan. It is alleged that the appellant has purchased the above said property for Rs. 35 lakh and rest of the amount i.e. Rs. 35 lakh was deposited in his ICICI Bank Account no. 629401139789 at Nehru Place, New Delhi. However, the ground situation is different as the appellant has opened the said account in October, 2011 and only a sum of Rs. 20,000/- has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at on the date of execution of loan agreement and submitting the title documents, there is a presumption that being a consultant, he might be aware that the title documents are forged and fabricated. 29. As per ground reality, all professionals such like - advocates, solicitors, consultants, chartered accountants, doctors, surgeons used to receive their professional charges from their respective clients against service provided. The presumption under section 5(1)(a) cannot be drawn ipso facto that they have in their possession the proceed of crime received as professional charges and on the basis of presumption, their movable and immovable properties can be attached unless link and nexus directly or indirectly towards crime with the accu....