TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 129
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....20 IPC and Section 7 & 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, 1988 registered by the CBI against M/s. Videocon International Electronics Ltd. & others (Name of the Appellant does not figure in the RC) 31.01.2019 ECIR No. ECIR/02/HIU/2019 under PMLA, 2002 recorded on 31.01.2019 pursuant to registration of the above mentioned FIR ( Copy of ECIR) not supplied to the Appellant). 01.03.2019 Search conducted by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement at the registered office of the Appellant on 01.03.2019. Various documents two files containing pages 1 to 578 and 1 to 46 respectively seized from the office of the appellant without even mentioning as to what these files are about and what papers/documents do these files contain. 28.03.2019 OA dated 28.03.2019 under Section 17(4) of PMLA related to the searches conducted at the premises of the appellant bearing OA No. 294/2019 filed by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement. Undated Adjudicating Authority passed the impugned undated order recording satisfaction in terms of Section 8(1) of PMLA, 2002. 10.04.2019 Pursuant to the above mentioned undated order, the Adjudicating Authority issued Show Cause Notice t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction u/s 8(2) and 8(3) shall be an order and they are appealable u/s 26(1) of PMLA. ii) All the actions u/s 8(1) to 8(3) are appealable under 26(1) of PMLA in addition to order of the Adjudicating Authority u/s 8(4) of PMLA. c) The above proposed legal implications will lead to multiple appeals against the retention order of the seizure/provisional attachment of assets, etc. passed by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 8(4) because according to petitioner appeal shall not only lie against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 8(4) but against all the procedural acts by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 8(1) to 8(3) necessary to pass an order u/s 8(4). d) This further leads to another important question whether any act undertaken by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 8(1), 8(2) and 8(3) can legally be considered as order appealable u/s 26(1) even when the Adjudicating Authority can pass order only u/s 8(4). It is prayed that this Tribunal must decide the basic question before taking up the case for further orders. 5. Along with the written submission, Mr. Nitesh Rana also filed the proof of service of the notice issued under section 8(1). It appears that the appellants wer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en the seizure memo prepared at the time of search and seizure is contrary to Rule 3(3)(A) read with Rule 5 of the PMLA(Forms, Search & Seizure, Etc.) Rules, 2005 read with Section 65 of PMLA and Section 100 Cr. PC. 9. Mr. Rana admits that there are certain discrepancies while recording the reason to believe. He also admits thirty days notice was not given (as stipulated in section 8(1) of the Act). However, his submission is that the said discrepancies and defect can be cured under section 68 of PMLA and even time of 30 days can be given to the appellants to file reply which is main purpose of issuance of notice. 10. The learned counsel for the appellants has filed the written submission, Para-2 of the written submission reads as under: "a. An undated impugned order is passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority, in which order, the Ld. Adjudicating Authority has perused the Original Complaint and the Provisional Attachment Order, though the case is that of Original Application and Panchnama/Seizure. b. Thereafter, another order is passed for preponement of the date of hearing, however, the earlier order is again passed, as if being passed for the very first time, wherein howev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der was reserved. Let me now first deal with the objection of maintainability of appeal. 13. The provision of Section 26 of PMLA, 2002 reads as under:- "26. Appeals to Appellate Tribunal.- (1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (3), the Director or any person aggrieved by an order made by the Adjudicating Authority under this Act, may prefer an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. (2) xxx xxx xxx (3) xxx xxx (4) On receipt of an appeal under sub-section (1), or sub-section (2), the Appellate Tribunal may, after giving the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, confirming, modifying or setting aside the order appealed against. (5) xxx xxx xxx (6) xxx xxx xxx‖ Section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 clearly provides that an aggrieved person can prefer an Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and upon consideration of the matter, the Appellate Tribunal can pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, confirming, modifying or setting aside the order appealed against. 14. a) The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Farida Begum Biswas Vs. Union of India & Ors. 2015 SCC OnLine Del 11834 has held as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The Appellants place reliance on the judgments passed therein. a) The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Maya Devi v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi, 2007 SCC OnLine Del 1349 had held as under: 5. Section 29 of the Act provides for appeal to the Court of Session within thirty days from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate is served on the aggrieved person or the respondent. 6. When specific remedy by way of appeal or by way of alteration, modification or revocation of any order, has been provided under the Act, prima facie, the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, or section 482, Cr. P.C. is not maintainable before this Court. b) In Ajay Kant & Ors. Vs. Smt. Alka Sharma 2008 (1) JCC 174, it was held as under: 16. It is submitted that the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Deputy Director Directorate Of Enforcement Vs. M/s Balasore Alloys Ltd. in Crl. A. 616/2018 decided on 21.08.2018 is not applicable to the facts of the case, as the same is a consent order. It was specifically observed in the said judgment, as under:- 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that this order of consent, on instructions from the competent a....