TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 194
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- -<br>PMLA<br>MP-PMLA-11237/DLI/2023 Exemp. FPA-PMLA-5651/DLI/2023, MP-PMLA-11239/DLI/2023 Exemp. FPA-PMLA-5652/DLI/2023, MP-PMLA-11241/DLI/2023 Exemp. FPA-PMLA-5653/DLI/2023, MP-PMLA-11362/DLI/2023 Exemp. FPA-PMLA-5729/DLI/2023, FPA-PMLA-5629/DLI/2023, MP-PMLA-11221/DLI/2023 Exemp. FPA-PMLA-5645/DLI/2023 and MP-PMLA-11223/DLI/2023 Exemp. FPA-PMLA-5646/DLI/2023 JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI SHRI V. ANANDARAJAN For the Appellants : Mr. Sidhant Saraswat, Mr. Surya P. Singh, Advocates For the Respondent : Ms. Nidhi Raman and Ms. Ridhi Kapoor, Advocates FINAL ORDER By batch of these appeals, a challenge has been made to the order dated 5th January 2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the provisional attachment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CL, CISF, railways and other departments. 9.0550 metric ton of stolen coal was recovered from the railway siding at Pandeshwar area and seized. It was found that one Anup Majee @ Lala was one of the main organizer for most of the illegal mining at ECL area and transportation of the stolen coal. He was running criminal activities in connivance with the public servants who allowed to misappropriate the Government property. 5. The statement under section 50(2) and 50(3) of the Act of 2002 were recorded by the respondents. Shri Anup Majee in his statement admitted about generation of huge unaccounted income from the activity of illegal coal mining and various other activities. It is with a further admission that appellant Gurupada Maji was h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ants named above despite repeated opportunity for the aforesaid. The appellant Gurupada Maji however admitted that after acquisition of Kolkata based companies named above, he created assets in the form of unquoted shares, advances and credit balance in the bank accounts of those companies through accommodation entries with the help of two chartered accountants named above. 8. The acquired immovable properties out of proceeds of crime was quantified to Rs. 7,90,21,182/-. The provisional attachment was earlier also caused in reference to the commission of offence and to attach the proceeds of crime. The Adjudicating Authority has confirmed the provisional attachment order and aggrieved by the aforesaid, this appeal has been filed. 9. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eipt of Rs. 26 crores from appellant Gurupada Maji and his family members for accommodation entries was admitted. It was even by the appellant in his statement under section 50 of the Act of 2002. The statement of Sh. Anup Majee was also referred who has admitted about his involvement in illegal activities for excavation of the coal and theft with the support of Rubin Kalia, Sanju Malik and many other where appellant was a partner. The corroborated statement was found sufficient to find a case against the appellant for their involvement in illegal excavation of coal. 12. The elaborate argument was further made by the respondent and would be referred by us while recording our finding to the argument of the appellant. Finding of the Tri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts sale thereupon. The appellant himself admitted for receipt of the proceeds of crime by involving in the illegal excavation of coal. 15. The counsel for the appellants submitted that the property of the company belonging to the wife of Gurupada Manji has been attached in ignorance of the fact that the main accused was holder of only 40% shares in the company and wife has not acquired the proceeds of crime. The argument aforesaid has been made in ignorance of their statement under section 50 of the Act of 2002. It has been admitted that appellant Gurupada Manji's wife was not looking after the company, but was a housewife. There was no source for her to acquire the property and otherwise the property attached by the respondents and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....witnesses under section 50 of the Act of 2002 are admissible in law and the respondents have not relied merely on the statement of the witnesses but when vigilance along with task force conducted a joint inspection, the equipments and vehicles were found in the leasehold area of ECL to prove illegal excavation of coal and otherwise coal was recovered and found at the railway siding. The appellant otherwise failed to disclose the source to acquire the property because the amount transferred in the account of the shell company was without involvement of any business in their hands to generate the income. In fact for layering the proceeds of crime, the appellant Gurapada Maji used the shell companies, otherwise, record of those companies was n....