TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1639
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....I, (ii) Investigation Report of SBI, (iii) Statement(s) of accounts in respect of Sh. Hinish Ramchandani and others with State Bank of India, Main Branch, Kanpur, (iv) Statement(s) of account of M/s SRS Investment Company & others with Union Bank of India, Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur, (v) Statement(s) of account of M/s SRS Investment Company & others with the Indus Ind Bank, Kanpur, (vi) Statement(s) of account of Sh. Hinish Ramchandani, Smt. Nandani Ramchandani, Smt. Pushpa Ramchandani, Smt. Preeti Sewani and others with ICICI Bank, IDBI Bank, Dena Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Indus Ind Bank, Development Co-operative Bank Ltd.. HDFC Bank etc. (vii) Statement(s) of account of M/S SRS Laminators, M/s Rajiv Filling Station Pvt. Ltd., M/s Rajiv Motors and M/s Tejal Agencies with SBI, ICICI Bank Ltd., Indus Ind Bank. Bank, IDBI Bank, Dena Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Indus Ind Bank, Development Co-operative Bank Ltd., HDFC Bank, Bank of Baroda, Axis Bank etc. (ix) documents seized from the residence and office premises of Sh. Hinish Ramchandani on 15.10.2012 as a result as search action u/s 70 of PMLA, (x) replies received from M/s SRS Investment Co., M/s SRS Developers, M/s SRS Lamina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 67186492515) for Rs.25 lakhs dated 15.06.12. 5. Confirm the attachment of property at Sl. No. 6 i.e. Vehicle No. UP78-CP-7900-SKODA FABIA. 6. Confirm the attachment of property at Sl. No. 7 i.e. Vehicle No. DLITAJ 2250-BMW (5) CAR to the extent of Rs. 7,24,120.00, to be paid by the owner, failing which the complete vehicle would stand attached. 7. Confirm the attachment of property at Sl. No. 8 i.e. Vehicle No. DLITAJ-6677-AUDI CAR to the extent of Rs. 10,27,413.00, to be paid by the owner, failing which the complete vehicle would stand attached. 8. Confirm the attachment of property at Sl. No. 9 i.e. investment of Rs. 66,82,642.40 in 57 Life Insurance Policies, as detailed in the attachment order. 9. Confirm the attachment of property at Sl. No. 10 i.e. Investment of Rs. 2.25,000/- as booking amount in Apartment No. AMN 0071208 at Aman Jaypee Green, to be paid by the M/S Naver Associates Ltd., Jaypee Greens, Sector-128. Noida i.e. Defendant No. 13 failing which the apartment stood attached. 10. Confirm the attachment of proceeds of crime of "proceeds of following properties in lieu of investment of Rs. 539,85,506.62, attached ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l the above properties were attached by the Debts Recovery Tribunal Allahabad in DRC no. 457 of 2013 and 459 of 2013 arising out of OA no. 20 of 2009 (SBI versus Rajiv Filling Station Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.) and OA no. 10 of 2009 (SBI versus SRS Investment Company) respectively. The Recovery Officer, DRT, Allahabad vide order dated 03.04.2014 directed the Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, GOI, Zonal Office, Lucknow to clarify the position or file objections if any in the matter. In response thereto the Directorate of Enforcement, Zonal Office, Lucknow filed detailed objections against the attachment of mortgaged properties by the DRT, Allahabad. These objections were considered and decided by the Recovery Officer DRT, Allahabad by passing a detailed order dated 21.11.2014. 6. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant stated that it is relevant to mention here that the Recovery Officer in his order dated 21.11.2014 made the following observation: "In view of above, keeping in view, the fact that huge amount of public money is of secured creditor is blocked and to meet the ends of justice the prayer of CH Bank to proceed for auction is allowed subject to the condition that from t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cord. For the same Impugned Order, the Appeals filed by other Appellants have already been dismissed by this Appellate Tribunal. It therefore becomes pertinent that the observations which have been made in those Orders of the Tribunal, particularly in relation to the Appellant Bank, are taken into consideration. In the Final Order dated 07.06.2024 in the Appeals Nos. FPA-PMLA-538 to 540/LKW/2013 filed by Sh. Hinish Ramchandani, Smt. Nandani Ramchandani and Ms. Preeti Sewani. The following observations have been made: "5. After hearing the rival submissions, we have given our thoughtful consideration to the same. Admittedly, the most of the properties of present appellants are already mortgaged with the bank. The value of the attached properties is quite less than the quantum of fraud committed by the appellants for availing the credit facilities and then siphoning of the funds. This Appellate Tribunal has no inherent jurisdiction to scrutinize and evaluate the quality of evidence collected by the Central Bureau of Investigation and to verify the prima facie case for commission of schedule offences by the appellants. The fact that some of the appellants are not cha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... being distinct from the purpose of the RDBA, SARFAESI Act and Insolvency Code, the latter three legislations do not prevail over the former. (vii) The PMLA, by virtue of section 71, has the overriding effect over other existing laws in the matter of dealing with "money laundering" and "proceeds of crime" relating thereto. (viii) The PMLA, RDBA, SARFAESI Act and Insolvency Code (or such other laws) must co-exist, each to be construed and enforced in harmony, without one being in derogation of the other with regard to the assets respecting which there is material available to show the same to have been "derived or obtained" as a result of "criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence" and consequently being "proceeds of crime", within the mischief of the PMLA. xxxx (xii) An order of attachment under the PMLA is not illegal only because a secured creditor has a prior secured interest (charge) in the property, within the meaning of the expressions used in the RDBA and SARFAESI Act. Similarly, mere issuance of an order of attachment under the PMLA does not ipso facto render illegal a prior charge or encumbrance of a secured creditor, the claim of the ....