TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 615
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....attachment order (PAO) dated 7th June, 2021 in ECIR/03/INSZO/2014 passed by Respondent No. 1- Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Indore passed under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter 'PMLA Act'). The petitioner also challenges the show cause notice dated 13th July, 2021 issued by the Adjudicating Authority (hereinafter 'AA') 3. The present petition was first listed on 13th August, 2021 on which date the following order was passed: "CM APPL. 26012/2021 (Exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 8421/2021 & CM APPL. 26011/2021 (stay) 3. Vide the present petition, the petitioners s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facts which were subject matter of the previous PAO dated 04.10.2018, which was not approved by the Adjudicating Authority, it is directed that till the next date, the operation of the impugned PAO dated 07.06.2021 shall remain stayed, as also all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom. 8. List on 07.01.2022." 4. A perusal of the above order would show that the case of the Petitioner is that the allegations raised against the Petitioner in the impugned PAO dated 7th June, 2021 were identically raised in a previous proceeding wherein PAO No. 01/2018 was issued by the Director, Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi on 4th January, 2018. 5. It is observed that the FIR bearing Number RC 221/2014/E0001 dated 7th J....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h is stated to be pending in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal constituted under Section 25 of the PMLA Act. 7. Despite the said proceedings, the AA has, pursuant to the impugned PAO, issued a show cause notice dated 13th July, 2021. This second show cause notice has also been challenged by the Petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal. Copy of the said appeal has been filed before this Court. 8. On behalf of the Petitioner, it is submitted by ld. Counsel that insofar as the allegation that the award of the coal block was illegally allotted in favour of the Petitioner is concerned, the Petitioner has succeeded before the Supreme Court. Vide its judgment dated 17th August, 2022 in B.L.A Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs Union Of India (UoI) an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot functional thus the Petitioners have no other efficacious / alternate remedy other than approaching this Hon'ble Court under Writ jurisdiction." 11. The factual scenario that, emerges from the above events that have transpired is that, firstly, there is one appeal in the earlier round of proceedings, filed by the ED challenging the adjudicating authority's order dated 20th June, 2018. Secondly, the show cause notice issued pursuant to the PAO under challenge has also been challenged by the Petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal. Thirdly, the judgment of the Supreme Court has also been rendered on 17th August, 2022 which the Petitioner can rely upon. 12. The relevant extract of the Supreme Court judgement in B.L.A. Industries Pvt.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich was found to be fatally flawed. 21. It is therefore held that allocation of the coal block made in form of the Petitioner did not run foul of the procedure prescribed in the MMDR Act and the MC Rules. The Petitioner was not allocated the coal block either through the Screening Committee Route or the Central Government Dispensation Route, which fact was not pointed out by the Respondent No. 1 - UOI at the appropriate stage, that led to painting the Petitioner with the same brush as the other allottee listed in Annexures - 1 and 2. Having held that the Petitioner was not a beneficiary of the flawed process, the consequences spelt out in the Second Judgment would not apply to it and therefore, it cannot be called upon to pay penal....