TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1072
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5.11.2014 had stayed the notice. The Tribunal on 09.04.2015 had further directed the Appellant to pay the charges of Rs. 50,000/- per month for use and occupation of the said property with effect from 01.11.2014. The Appellant had filed an Application praying for reduction of charges for use and occupation of the attached property from Rs. 50,000/- per month to Rs. 20,000/- per month. This Tribunal on 29.10.2015 had ordered that the Application shall be considered at the time of consideration of Appeal. On 20.10.2016, the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant stated that the Appellant had been paying the charges as per the Order of the Tribunal. The Interim Order dated 05.11.2014 was continued till further orders by this Tribunal on 28.09.2020. The Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution on 20.11.2024. However, the Appeal was restored to its original position vide Order dated 26.03.2025. As prayed the Appeal was listed for final hearing on 10.07.2025. 3. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant argued that the Appellant has not been named as an accused in the Charge Sheet dated 27.03.2009 filed by the CBI in the scheduled offence. Ld. Counsel further argued that since the Appellant has not been cha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....el contended that cash amount of Rs. 9,00,000/- which was deposited in the account of the Appellant was given by his grandmother Smt. Prem Lata Choradia. 5. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant argued that the Respondent Directorate did not conduct any independent investigations. The entire case of the Respondent Directorate is based upon oral statements which has less evidentiary value than the evidence based on documents. Ld. AA erred in holding the case against the Appellant by depending upon the statements recorded under Section 50 of PMLA. Ld. Counsel also argued that the reasons to believe which is an essential ingredient of Section 5(1) of PMLA is missing. There are no reasons to believe for invoking the provisional attachment of the impugned property. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant also questioned the impugned order on the grounds that there is no direct link between the scheduled offence and the said property, even though the Respondent has alleged it to be proceeds of crime. He, therefore, pleaded that the Appeal may be allowed. 6. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent stated that the case has arisen with the FIR Bearing No. 07(E)/2007 dated 04.10.2007 registered by CBI at the instanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 14 lakhs, 18.01 lakhs, 9 lakhs, 15.28 lakhs, 8.46 lakhs and 19 lakhs (9 + 2.75 + 14 + 18.01 + 9 + 15.28 + 8.46 + 19 = Total 95.50 lakhs) are reflecting. Further, receipt of Rs. 14.35 lakhs on 28.06.2012 is seen which has been remitted to M/s S. E. Investment, Jaipur. 14. Though these entries are reflecting in the Bank Account Statement, it is pertinent to note that these are immediate result of cash deposit in the respective Bank accounts through which Shri Vaibhav Choradia has purchased the house located at B-73, Gautam Marg, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur in his Account No. 51025360171 held with SBBJ, IBB, Jaipur. All these transactions do not match with income profile of Shri Vaibhav Choradia." 8. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent further argued that loan was shown to have been taken from units outside Jaipur even though these were related units. He stated that Rs. 19 lakhs was received from M/s Vikas Book Agencies, Agra and Rs. 22.81 lakhs was received from M/s Ratan Prakashan Mandir through banking channel but this whole amount of Rs. 41.81 lakhs had arisen out of immediate cash deposits in the respective bank accounts. Ld. Counsel alleged that these loans were nothing but attempt to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sidered the rival submissions and the material on record. The Appellant has contended that the impugned property has been purchased from the loans obtained from various parties. The Respondent has denied the claim made by the Appellant and has argued that the impugned property has been purchased from proceeds of crime. The impugned property which has been valued in the books at Rs. 1,00,66,638/- including the registration charges is claimed by the Appellant to have been funded by loans in the following manner: Sl. No. Name of the Lender Amount 1. Naina Designer Wear Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 23,00,000/- 2. Chordia Safe Deposit & Vaults Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 26,47,700/- 3. S.E. Investment Rs. 15,28,000/- 4. Vikas Book Agencies Branch of Ratan Prakashan Mandir Rs. 19,00,000/- 5. Ratan Prakashan Mandir Rs. 14,35,000/- TOTAL Rs. 98,10,000/- I find that the Respondent Directorate has investigated each of the five sources of funds as mentioned afore by the Appellant. 10. Naina Designer Wear Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur is a garment company which appears to have been established by the Choradia Family in the year 2010. The Appellant along with his brother Shri Vipul Choradia are Directors ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts account in Canara Bank, Agra. It was found out that prior to the RTGS on the same day Rs. 20 lakhs was deposited in the said account. The said cash was deposited in three tranches of Rs. 9 lakhs, of Rs. 9 lakhs & of Rs. 2 lakhs. The Appellant has failed to explain about source of cash deposits in the account of M/s Vikas Books Agencies, who too have failed to explain the source of such cash deposits. It is not disputed that M/s Vikas Books Agencies is a branch of Ratan Prakashan Mandir. 13. Similar modus has been adopted for the transfer of Rs. 14.35 lakhs on 28.06.2012 to the Appellant's Bank Account through RTGS from the bank account of M/s Ratan Prakashan Mandir in Canara Bank, Agra. Prior to the RTGS transfer, cash amount of Rs. 14.35 lakhs in tranches of Rs. 10 lakhs & Rs. 4.35 lakhs was deposited in the said account. No explanation has been offered either for the cash deposits or for the sources thereof. 14. The aforementioned transfers are corroborated by the analysis of the bank account no. 51025360171 of the Appellant held with SBBJ, IBB, Jaipur. From the said account, it is also revealed that Rs. 15.28 lakhs was received through RTGS on 02.05.2012 from M/s S. E. Inve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent can be subjected to seizure." 17. The aforementioned findings as discussed have been drawn from the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Others v. Union of India &Ors. reported in (2022) SCC Online 929. The relevant paragraph is cited: "169. As aforesaid, in this backdrop Amendment Act 2 of 2013 came into being. Considering the purport of the amended provisions and the experience of implementing/enforcement agencies, further changes became necessary to strengthen the mechanism regarding prevention of money laundering. It is not right in assuming that the attachment of property (provisional) under the second proviso, as amended, has no link with the scheduled offence. Inasmuch as Section 5(1) envisages that such an action can be initiated only on the basis of material in possession of the authorised officer indicative of any person being in possession of proceeds of crime. The precondition for being proceeds of crime is that the property has been derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. The sweep of Section 5(1) is not limited to the accused named in the crimi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rate to collect material for issuing the PAO. This is also obvious on perusal of the material which clearly shows that a large number of statements of the involved persons and parties had been recorded before issuing the PAO. I, therefore, find that reasons to believe u/s 5(1) of PMLA were available with the Respondent Directorate to effect the attachment. It is also seen that the Ld. Adjudicating Authority passed the impugned order after taking into consideration not only the material on record but also after having given the opportunity to the Appellant as well as others to submit their defence. It has been mentioned in the impugned order that the foreign buyers either returned the export goods or denied having conducted such transactions with the aforementioned exporters. It is thus clear that the bank loans were diverted for personal gains and cash deposits were made to create a trail of bank transfers so as to make funds given to the Appellant as genuine loans. 20. The Application filed by the Appellant for reduction in occupation and user charges from Rs. 50,000/- per month to Rs. 20,000/- per month is required to be disposed of at the time of consideration of the Appeal as ....