TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1137
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nwar 5109511.92 4 7713031036520 49117.00 5 7713031036537 49117.00 6 7713031039750 1136708.00 7 4160000100082075 PNB Nagra, Ajmer Narendra Tanwar 1041121.00 8 416000100001612 Manju Tanwar 1670993.00 9 4160007600001603 Priyanshu Tanwar 1144934.00 10 680401429368 ICICI RBSE Campus, Ajmer Narendra Tanwar 93152.52 11 680414000904 5554.00 12 680414001662 109695.00 13 91104000164832 IDBI Shankar Place, Opp. City Power House, Ajmer Narendra Tanwar 758683.00 14 91104000192729 Manju Tanwar 419366.00 15 14261088 (Dmat A/c) Narendra Tanwar 41550.00 16 330310094044 UCO Bank Purani Mandi, Ajmer Manju Tanwar 1135946.00 17 330310083000 1097982.00 Total 2,31,04,618.13 2. As per the facts of the case, the Anti-Corruption B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n, the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the attachment of the properties in OC No. 284/2014 vide its order dated 30.07.2014. Aggrieved by the said order, appellants filed the present appeals. 3. During the arguments, Ld. Counsel for the appellants contended that no independent investigation has been conducted by ED and hence, the attachment needs to be set-aside. In support of his contention, he relied on the judgment of this tribunal in case of Yashraj Films Pvt. Ltd. v. the Deputy Director, ED, Mumbai, MANU ML 0022/2019, wherein it was held that: "the power given to the officer concerned is not an arbitrary power and has to be exercised in accordance with the restraints imposed by law. The belief must be that an honest and reasonable person and based upon reasonable grounds, the officer concerned may act on direct or circumstantial evidence, but not on mere suspicious or the allegations mentioned in the FIR or chargesheet so that the same can be scrutinized in order to verify they are relevant and germane or not." He stressed that in the present case, the ED has not independently investigated the allegation of disproportionate assets to the known sources of inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns prior to initiating any action is duty bound to record reasons in writing which cannot be mere formality but should be germane and relevant to the subjective opinion formed by authority. Reasons recorded are subject to judicial review and court may look into material which made basis of reasons recorded. 17.2 In the present case, concededly property was purchased in 1991 and mortgaged with bank in 2009. The alleged offence was committed in 2013 whereas attachment order was passed in December 2017. There is nothing on record to show that Appellants after 2009 or 2013 attempted to dispose of the property in question which prompted the Respondent to pass attachment order. The Respondent has simply taken wording of Section 5(1) of the PMLA and reiteration of these words would not constitute recording of reasons that if property is not attached, it may result in frustrating any proceedings of confiscation. The Respondent was bound to record the reasons on the basis of material in his possession that property is likely to be concealed or transferred or dealt with in any manner. Use of all the words i.e. concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner shows that Respondent ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere is no reason to believe that the property already seized by ACB could be alienated by the appellants. Moreover, the ED in the present ECIR, based on the second FIR No. 196/2013 dated 10.05.2013 had already made an attachment to the tune of Rs. 1,60,85,107/- vide PAO No. 08/2014 and thereafter, filed Original Complaint No. 373/2014 for confirmation of said PAO. Accordingly, he stressed that the present confirmation order based on PAO No.4/2014 of the scheduled offence is not maintainable, since the proceeds of crime have already been attached by the ED. After investigation in second FIR, chargesheet no. 76/2014 dated 27.03.2014 was filed against him. Hence the present attachment vide PAO No. 04/2014 needs to be set aside, on account of double attachment. He argued that the property as seized by ACB, Ajmer, has been seized as part of disproportionate asset which is exactly the same amount as attached by Respondent ED. Moreover, the intent of seizure under PC Act, for an offence u/s 13(1)(e) is similar to that of PMLA i.e. to confiscate the seized property at the end of the trial. Accordingly, he stressed that the prerequisite twin conditions for attachment are not fulfilled and h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t investigation, which may lead to many contradictions. ED has to confine itself on the following points during its investigation for money laundering: - i) Whether there is any prima facie incriminating evidence against the culprits for commission of schedule offence; ii) Whether any proceeds of crime were generated by commission of crime/predicate offence; iii) Whether the said proceeds of crime are laundered, or likely to be laundered; iv) If proceeds of crime are laundered, then the mode of layering of the same, or the trail of POC; v) If proceeds of crime are already dissipated, then the other properties of the culprits which can be attached, in absence of direct/indirect POC; vi) Whether the claimants of attached properties are genuine, or part & parcel of conspiracy. In case of commission of offence u/s 13(1)(e) of PC Act, the quantum of disproportionate assets to the known sources of income of the family of the public servant is the proceeds of crime, in absence of any explanation for acquisition of the same. As per investigation conducted by ACB of Rajasthan Police, appellants were found in possession of the dispropo....