2025 (8) TMI 1299
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vey Number 35 (part) C.T. S. No. 156/a/9C to 3 village Dindoshi, Taluka-Borivali, P/South Municipal Ward in Greater Mumbai having agreement (market) value of Rs. 90,00,000/- registered in the name of M/s. DB Jajodia (HUF) through its karta Shri Dinesh Jajodia. 2. As per the facts of the case, the FIR No. 760/2015 dated 18.12.2015 was registered at PS MIDC, Mumbai for commission of offences under Section 409, 420, 477(A) read with 120(B) of IPC against the S/Shri Prashant Mulekar, Kiran Kulkarni, Pankaj Kumar Srivastava & Dinesh Jajodia and later-on investigation was transferred to the Economic Offence Wing (EOW), Mumbai, Unit No. V and re-registered the case vide C.R. No. 88/2015. On the basis of the said FIR, ED the Directorate of Enforcement recoded the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) No. 02/MBZO/ 2016 dated 12.01.2016 against the aforesaid accused persons to investigate the offence of money laundering. After completion of the investigation, the EOW, Mumbai filed the chargesheet no. 233 dated 16.04.2016 against the aforesaid accused persons for the said offence before Hon'ble ACMM, 47th Court, Esplanade Road, Mumbai. The said chargesheet revealed that: (i) M/s. G....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....desic Limited. (ii) In 2008, M/s. GL raised 125 Million USD by issuing Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB's) for which Citibank, London acted as Trustee The said FCCB amounting to USD 125 Million USD was raised by M/s. GL for investment in its overseas subsidiaries or acquisition of new overseas subsidiaries. The maturity date for the FCCB's was January, 2013 and the maturity value was approximately 165 Million USD. (iii) M/s. GL has its two direct overseas subsidiaries viz. M/s. Geodesic Technologies Solution Limited (M/s. GTSL), Hong Kong and M/s. Geodesic Holding Limited (M/s. GHL), Mauritius. (iv) M/s. GL through M/s. GHL, Mauritius had acquired two step- down subsidiaries viz. M/s. Zomo Technologies (British Virgin Island) and M/s. Emiloto Associates (Panama) which were based in tax haven countries. (v) M/s. GL had further made investment of the part of FCCB funds through these two companies to ADG Fund, Bermuda. M/s Gl. had also invested the funds through M/s. GTSL, Hong Kong into M/s Enterprise Emerging Market Funds (EEMF). (vi) The chart showing the funds flow of the FCCB amount of USD 125 Million is indicated in the complaint. (vii) Further, it wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....minal activities related to scheduled offences. (ix) Further M/s. GL had purchased software from six shell companies viz. (i) HPL Multitrade Limited, (ii) Anikesh Trading Pvt Ltd (iii) Divya Infotech Pvt. Ltd., (iv) Alogorithmic Software Systems Pvt. Ltd., (v) Idor Systems & Solutions Pvt. Ltd., (vi) Netformx Information Technology Pvt. Ltd. against fictitious invoices. Shri Mangiram Sharma who was operating those 6 companies in his statement recorded under PMLA, 2002 admitted that Geodesic Group companies were used to transfer funds to the accounts of 6 companies against the bogus purchase of goods/software for which no software/goods were ever delivered to M/s. Geodesic Group companies as the purchase of software by M/s. Geodesic Limited was merely book entry. Shri Prashant Mulekar Director of M/s. Geodesic Limited used to give direction to him (Shri Magniram Sharma) to further transfer the funds to the account of the companies as introduced by him on account of bogus purchase of software. The funds amounting to Rs. 250 Crore (approx.) have been diverted/siphoned off from M/s GL to shell companies in India through bogus purchases. The investigation under PMLA, 2002 had so far r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cating Authority along with relied upon documents. The Adjudicating Authority after going through the allegations mentioned in the OC coupled with the relied upon documents issued the Show Cause Notice to M/s DB Jajodia (HUF) (herein appellant). After receiving the reply and hearing the rival submissions the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the PAO vide order dated 02.12.2016. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed the present appeal. It is pertinent to mentioned here that during the pendency of the said appeal, appellant also moved the Misc. Application No. 4301/2024 for releasing of the property of the appellant on the ground that the properties of the appellant are attached as the value thereof, whereas subsequently ED attached the properties as direct proceeds of crime vide PAO No. 08/2023 dated 06.10.2023 and thereafter filed the Original Complaint No. 2090/2023 before the Adjudicating Authority for confirmation of the said properties. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the PAO in the said OC vide subsequent order dated 04.03.2024. 3. During the arguments, Ld. Counsel for the appellant has not argued the appeal on the merits and the grounds mentioned therein, but s....