TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 68
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... against the Company and its Director was for cheating gullible people promising huge commissions on the investment in their Company by running money circulation scheme under the guise of direct selling of products in front end. It was found to be franchise of QNet Company in India. The Company was promoting illegal money circulation scheme and enrolling members in binary scheme promising easy money. The FIR was registered for the offence under Section 420, 406, 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The ECIR was then recorded finding a case under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering, Act, 2002 (in short "the Act of 2002") punishable under Section 4 of the Act of 2002. Thereafter an investigation was caused by the respondent. 3. The modus operandi of M/s VDSIPL was to contact the victims through persons known to them, arrange for meeting with them during which a hype is to be created about the Company without properly revealing its actual business activities and convince the investors with the promises of fancy returns running into crores of rupees. They made members who were asked to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....people also arrange for personal loans to their victims from various Banks for investment in VDSIPL. 4. Upon receipt of investment from the victims, their credentials are collected and email accounts are created in their names and the User names and Passwords are retained by the VDSIPL people, who then misuse the same to send fake/false orders to Vihaan Company without the consent/knowledge of the investor/ member. Consequently, the member receives messages that the purchases have been made against the amount invested by him, but deliveries are shown to some unknown addresses / fake addresses. Though a 30-days-refund policy exists for these products on paper, the purchase is informed to the member only after lapse of 30 days. The victims are not even told initially in which company their money has been invested and it is only after they have given all the money that they are informed about the chain system. Then the member is given the task of getting more members under a Multi- Level Marketing Scheme and informed that he would be entitled to commission depending on the number of members he gets to join in the scheme. Thus, cache investor is induced into roping in more mem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 4,70,39,593/-. Out of the aforesaid amount, a sum of Rs. 1.80 Crore was paid to Shri Suresh Thimri and remaining Rs. 39.80 lakhs distributed amongst the partners. The trail of the proceed of crime revealed that M/s VDSIPL routed the money to the companies of Shri Suresh Thimri and Smt. Manju Suresh Thimri. It was through M/s Transview Enterprises India Private Limited and M/s Ciera Technologies Private Limited. The funds were further diverted/ invested in M/s Indian Vellness Solutions through various channels. The appellant Shri Suresh Thimri was found whole sole in-charge of the firm and partners were for namesake. The Adjudicating Authority accordingly allowed the retention of frozen bank account of the appellant. Arguments of the Counsel for the appellant: 6. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that without involvement of any of the appellants in commission of crime, their bank account has been frozen after search conducted by the respondent under Section 17(1) of the Act of 2002. Since the appellants are not involved in commission of crime, Prosecution Complaint has not been filed against them despite expiry of period of two years by now. This itself shows that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....commission of offence has been given in the impugned order, thus, not required to be repeated. However, Ld. Counsel for the respondent made elaborate arguments to disclose the involvement of the appellant for commission of crime and proceeds of crime in their hands warranting freezing of the bank accounts. The arguments raised by the respondent would be referred while dealing with the issues raised by the appellant to avoid repetition of one and same facts and for the sake of brevity. Findings of the Tribunal: 10. The fact pertaining to the registration of the FIR and recoding of the ECIR has been given in the opening paras of this order. The main allegation was against M/s VDSIPL for commission of crime. The modus operandi of the Company involved in the commission of crime has also been given. It is along with the role of the appellant, Shri Suresh Thimiri who is named as an accused in the Prosecution Complaint, though according to the Ld. Counsel for the appellants, the appellants have not been named as an accused. The statement of the Ld. Counsel for the respondent is that in the supplementary Prosecution Complaint, the appellant, Shri Suresh Thimiri and its Firm have been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing undue hardships and harassment. In fact, the appellants were recipient of the commission out of their work. It may be from the accused company, M/s VDSIPL. 14. We have considered the submissions and find that during the search operation conducted by the respondent, they frozen the bank accounts. The Prosecution Complaint involving the appellant, Shri Suresh Thimiri has been filed, it is, thus, not correct to state that the appellant is not made an accused. In fact, name of Shri Suresh Thimiri and his Company, M/s Indian Vellness Solutions Private Ltd. were named as an accused and Smt. Manju Thimiri was acting at the behest of Shri Suresh Thimiri involving in commission of crime. 15. The appellants have failed to disclose their sources of the amount lying in the bank accounts for which notice was caused under Section 8(1) of the Act of 2002. As per Section 8(1) of the Act of 2002, noticee is required to disclose the source for acquisition of the property, but in the instant case, the appellants have failed to disclose the sources of the money lying in the bank accounts. It was, rather, found during the course of investigation that Shri Suresh Thimiri received huge amount ....