2020 (4) TMI 837

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) 01/ALSZO/2018 dated 14.09.2018 in ECIR/02/VSI/2012. 2. It is to mention here that the appellant, UPSDA herein is mentioned as Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (UPSIDC) at Varanasi and cited as defendant no.4. 3. It is the contention of the present appellant that it is a State Authority and has been erroneously shown to have committed the scheduled offences. It is also the contention of the appellant that the impugned judgment does not distinguish between the appellant and other respondents. 4. The CBI, ACB, Lucknow had registered a case against the respondent no.2, unknown official of District Industry Centre (DIC) and unknown official of Northern Coalfields Limited, Singr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ated 07.03.2019 of Adjudicating Authority may be modified in relation to the contention of the appellant that he has committed no scheduled offence in the instant matter. 8. Heard both parties on 13.03.2020 and gone through the materials placed on records. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently raised objection to the specific observations made in the impugned order, wherein, the Adjudicating Authority has concluded that the defendants have committed the scheduled offences, generated the proceeds of crime and laundered them. 9. On perusal of the impugned order & PAO, it is seen that nowhere there is any allegations made by the ED that the present appellant has committed the scheduled o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on 8 or section 58B or sub-section (2A) of section 60. 18. The Provisional Attachment Order is confirmed and Complaint is allowed. Conclusion: On a thorough perusal of the PAO, Complaint, relied upon documents, the investigations conducted by the ED and the statements recorded u/s 50 of the PMLA and on careful consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of the Complainant and Defendants undersigned comes to the prima facie conclusion that the Defendants have committed the Scheduled Offence, generated proceeds of crime and laundered them. No doubt the properties attached are proceeds of crime or value thereof and are involved in money laundering. Undersigned therefore orders confirmation of the above....