TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 867
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mittal, Raj Kumar Goel, and Ramesh Chandra Sharma 2. As per the facts of the case, Delhi Police, Crime Branch filed chargesheet in case FIR No. 205/2016 dated 25.05.2016 against the accused persons, namely, Raj Kumar Goel, Ashish Kumar, Rohit Tandon, Dinesh Kumar Bhola, Kamal Jain and Ramesh Chandra Sharma for commission of offences u/s 120-B IPC r.w.s. 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 188, 201, 109 & 34 of I.P.C. and also r.w.s. 11, 12 & 13 of P.C. Act and substantive offences thereunder. As per the said chargesheet, heavy cash was deposited in the bank accounts of various firms belonging to Raj Kumar Goel and Ramesh Chandra Sharma in Kotak Mahindra Bank and ICICI Bank after 08.06.2016 i.e. at the time of demonetization. The said accounts were also opened on the forged documents. On the basis of the information, the Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi Zone recorded ECIR No. 18/DZ-II/2016 on 26.12.2016 for initiating investigation for the offence of money laundering. During investigation conducted by Delhi Police, Crime Branch, it is revealed that accused Kamal Jain, CA, Rohit Tandon, and Dinesh Bhola, in execution of criminal conspiracy handed over the demonetized currency al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the tune of Rs. 1.4 Cr were identified and attached vide Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) dated 24.07.2017. This PAO was confirmed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority, PMLA vide its order dated 11.01.2018 in Original Complaint no. 808/2017. Further, part of Proceeds of Crime was identified and attached u/s 5(1) PMLA to the tune of Rs. 6,00,66,708/- vide PAO no. 06/2018 dated 23.03.2018. Original Complaint no. 933/2008 u/s 5(5) PMLA has been filed before Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority praying for confirmation of this PAO. Cumulatively, by these PAOs, properties involved in money laundering and proceeds of crime to the tune of Rs. 49.11 Cr. approx. have been attached. Thus, investigations were kept pending to ascertain the remaining amount of about Rs. 1.9 Cr. (approx.) that was part of the commission amount of Rs. 13.30 Cr. (approx.) that reached into the hands of accused persons including Yogesh Mittal, Ashish Kumar, Raj Kumar Goel and Ramesh Chandra Sharma Immediately after the demonetization policy announcement Rohit Tandon had asked his CA Kamal Jain to look after an arrangement to bank the demonetized currency so that in exchange, he could get the bankable instrumen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o International 12.11.2016 FTD to RK EMPORIUM 29,88,756 Total 80,00,000 During the further PMLA investigations efforts were made by ED to ascertain the genuineness of these transactions between the Raj Kumar Goel's operated firms and M/s RK Emporium Ludhiana. Raveendra Kumar Goel, Proprietor of M/s RK Emporium was called to join PMLA investigations. In his statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, he stated that he deals in clothing materials and denim. He procured these items from various mills from Ahmadabad Delhi etc. and sold it to various firms. He had known Yogesh Mittal as he was his relative and maintained contacts with him. With reference to his transactions with RK International and Virgo International firms allegedly operated by Raj Kumar Goel, he stated that he did not know about who was the proprietor of the firms, namely RK International and Virgo International. He further stated that these transactions are their first transactions and before that and even after that he never did any business transaction with Raj Kumar Goel, or the firms operated by him. He never met him in person. On enquiring about the placement of order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the accused/suspects and others u/s 50 of PMLA, 2002. The extracts of statements of appellant Raveender Kumar Goel, Proprietor of M/s R.K. Emporium as under: He started RK Emporium on his own in 1985. RK Emporium trades in knitting and wearing clothes. He did not remember clearly about transactions of RK Emporium done with RK International and Virgo International. As per his remembrance some agent had come to him to buy fabrics. The said agent booked the order and promised to make payment through RTGS within 15 days. However, he could not recall the name of the agent. Raveender Kumar Goyal further stated that this agent had never visited him, except for these two transactions. He also could not recall the name of the owners of these firms. After 15 days, he had received payment of Rs. 29,88,756/- from Virgo International and Rs. 50,11,244/- from RK International into his Kotak Mahindra Bank account number 2011262774 at Feroze Gandhi market Branch. He knew Yogesh Mittal as he was his distant relative. He had visited Yogesh Mittal at the time of operation of his son at Chennai in first quarter of January. But he stated that he had no financial dealings with Yogesh Mittal be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the said amount in the account of the supplier firms was not demonetized currency in any manner. Out of the said bank balance, the payment was transferred to M/s RK Emporium, a proprietorship concern of the appellant, as advance payment for supply of material. Therefore, there is no justification to treat the said amount out of the demonetized currency. Prayer is accordingly made that the present appeal needs to be allowed and thereby set aside the impugned order dated 29.11.2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, by following the order passed by this Appellate Tribunal in appeal no. FPA-PBPT-589/DLI/2019 dated 30.01.2025, on the identical lines. 4. Ld. counsel for the respondent ED submitted that the present case pertains to the offence of money laundering and hence, this case cannot be governed by the findings by the Adjudicating Authority and the final order passed by this Appellate Tribunal in PBPT case vide order dated 25.03.2019 and order dated 30.01.2025 respectively. He contended that even if the appellant is not named as an accused in the chargesheet filed by Crime Branch, Delhi Police, it will not affect the role of the present appellant pertaining to the offence ....