TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 268
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vide which properties attached by the Enforcement Directorate in PAO No. 1/2015 dated 07.01.20215 were confirmed. The details of the said properties are as under: Sl. No. Sale Deed and Date Purchaser Details of Immovable properties Location Area Consideration inRs. 1 2421 dated 19.08.2011, DSR PIRO, Bhojpur Smt. Savitri Devi Residential Plot at Mauza- Chilbilia, Thana- Piro, Dist.,- Bhojpur Thana No. 101 Khata No. 113 Khesra No. 172 6.25 Decimal Value 2,38,000 Registration 5530 Stamp Duty 14280 Total 2,57,810 2. 3516 dated 21.12.2011, DSR PIRO, Bhojpur Smt. Savitri Devi Land at Mauza-Piro, Thana-Piro, Dist.- Bhojpur (i) Thana No.-88 Ward No. 12, Khesra No. 4047, Khata No. 302 7.25 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ement Directorate recorded ECIR No. PTZO/04/2013 dated 16.05.2013. On the basis of material on record, ED was satisfied that the accused, Shri Surendra Tiwary had acquired properties in his name as well as in the name of his wife, Smt. Savitri Devi and Shri Prakash Roy and Shri Jagan Nath Roy from the proceeds of crime and therefore it passed PAO No. 01/2015 dated 07.01.2015. Thereafter, Original Complaint No. 412/2015 was forwarded to the Adjudicating Authority along with the relied upon documents for confirmation of said attachment. The Adjudicating Authority being satisfied with the allegations mentioned in the Original Complaint and the relied upon documents issued show-cause notice to the accused persons/defendants and after receivi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was accordingly made to allow the present appeal and thereby set-aside the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. Arguments of the respondent: 4. The Ld. Counsel for the respondent pointed out the incriminating materials against the appellant Shri Surendra Tiwary and his wife, Smt. Savitri Devi. He controverted the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the appellants, which will be reproduced in my findings in the following paras. Analysis and conclusion: 5. After hearing the rival submissions, I have given my thoughtful consideration of the same. Admittedly, at present, appellant Surendra Tiwary is facing trial along with co-accused persons in predicate offence and his wife Smt. Savitri Devi is also arrayed as an acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt of about Rs. 2.5 crores during the period from 2011 to 2013. Out of the four attached properties, two properties were purchased in August, 2011 and December, 2011. Accordingly, these two properties are apparently purchased by the appellants from the proceeds of crime. The property at SL. No. 3 and 4 were purchased in December 2010 and September 2007, respectively. Even if, it is presumed that these two properties are not purchased from the proceeds of crime, even then, in absence of the said proceeds of crime, these two properties can also be attached as value thereof under the second limb of the definition of "proceeds of crime" under Section 2(1)(u) of the Prevention of Money- Laundering Act, 2002, as per following analysis. To anal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as been given by the Delhi High Court in the case of Prakash Industries Ltd. v. Directorate of Enforcement reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Del 2087. The relevant para no. 105 of this judgment is reproduced as under:- "105. It would be pertinent to recall that properties which were acquired prior to the enforcement of the Act may not be completely immune from action under the Act in light of what this Court had held in Axis Bank. As was explained by the Court in Axis Bank, the expression proceeds of crime envisages both "tainted property as well as "untainted property" with it being permissible to proceed against the latter provided it is being attached as equal to the "value of any such property" or "property equivalent in value held w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary Vs. Union of India, wherein, it is held that- "68. It was also urged before us that the attachment of property must be equivalent in value of the proceeds of crime only if the proceeds of crime are situated outside India. This argument, in our opinion, is tenuous. For, the definition of "proceeds of crime" is wide enough to not only refer to the property derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence, but also of the value of any such property. If the property is taken or held outside the country, even in such a case, the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad can be proceeded with. The defi....