AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 799
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Penal Code, 1860 and section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, against Shri Ajit Kumar Gupta, Promoter/Director of the Anee group of companies, and various other accused persons, on the basis of complaints filed by the investors and other members of the public, at various police stations of Uttar Pradesh (Barabanki, Ayodhya, Sultanpur, Deoria, Lucknow), during the period 21/02/2020 to 26/10/2020. A total of 33 such FIRs were registered against Shri Ajit Kumar Gupta, Directors of Anee group of companies, and other associated individuals, based on the complaints filed for alleged offences of fraud and forgery committed by them. Subsequently, 19 Charge sheets in 10 FIRs were filed against them in 10 cases. 3. The main allegations contained in the said FIRs/Charge Sheets were that Shri Ajit Kumar Gupta established the firm, M/s. Anee Bullion Traders, in the year 2009-10 and through this firm, he started the business of trading in bullion, real estate and shares etc. Initially, he used the contacts of his elder brother, Shri Ramgopal Gupta, who was posted as Deputy Commissioner in Commercial Tax Department, Lucknow, and manipulate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....above stated facts, a Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) was issued on 31.03.2023 attaching a total of 20 immovable valued in all at Rs. 7,07,22,100/-. Consequently, an Original Complaint (O.C.) was filed before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority in the matter. 7. Vide the impugned order dated 04.09.2023, the Ld. AA has confirmed the PAO. 8. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has come in appeal against it before this Appellate Tribunal. Arguments on behalf of the appellant 9. The underlying facts of the case have not been disputed by the appellant. It is admitted that the Appellant had incorporated M/s. Anee Bullion Traders in the year 2009-10 and through the same, he started the business of trading in bullion, real estate and shares. In fact, even default in passing on the promised benefits to the persons who had paid money to the entities controlled by the appellant is also admitted, but it is argued that the same was for unforeseen reasons outside the control of the appellant. It is contended that of the appellant kept his promise and in the pursuance of the personal loan agreements, fully and in a timely manner, repaid the amounts taken before the September, 201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he offence of Money Laundering as defined u/s 3 of PMLA, it is necessary to show the existence of knowledge on the part of Defendants. 13. It is also argued that the immovable property attached by ED has no nexus with the proceeds of crime. The properties provisionally attached and then confirmed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority are not derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity and are hence not proceeds of crime. The Ld. AA has failed to appreciate the fact that as per Section 2(u) "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad. In the present case, neither the provisionally attached properties of the Appellant have been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity nor the properties have been taken or held outside the country. 14. With regard to the above, it is further submitted that the words "or the value of any such property" in Section 2(u) are not to be read on a stand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....comes unsustainable and inevitably collapses under its own weight. At this stage, the promoters of the scheme typically attempt to abscond from the scene. The operations which were being managed and run by the appellant in the present case clearly appear to follow this classic pattern. Funds were initially collected by the appellant through the firm Anee Bullion Traders set up by him, and subsequently, through Eye Vision Credit Co-operative Society which was being run by individuals who were directly or indirectly employed by him in his group entities. The promised returns were delivered at first, but subsequently, the funds dried up. 19. The Impugned Order also brings out that the funds collected under the schemes promising attractive returns were diverted and reinvested by the appellant in various businesses of the Anee group controlled by him. Further, the funds collected from investors, first through Anee Bullion Trader, and subsequently through Eye Vision Cooperative Society, were the only primary source of funds available to the appellant and he had no other sources for acquisition of the assets which have been attached by the Directorate. It has also rightly been pointed ....