TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 1282
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 23.08.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the provisional attachment order dated 06.03.2024. Brief facts of the case: 2. An FIR was registered on 15.12.2020 against M/s RE Cables and Conductors Pvt. Limited, its directors, and others for the commission of offences under Section 120-B read with Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, and 477-A of IPC and Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, for misappropriation of bank funds and defrauding the bank with an amount of Rs. 74.83 crores. After the investigation in pursuance to the FIR, CBI submitted the charge sheet on 21.02.2022, and thereupon the ECIR was recorded by the respondents, followed by the investigation under the Act of 2002. 3. M/s RE Cables and Condu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tachment order has been confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority finding involvement of the appellant and being recipient of the proceeds of crime and acquisition of the property under provisional attachment. Argument of the Ld. Counsel for the appellant: 5. The Counsel submits that appellants are not involved in the commission of the offence or recipient of the proceeds of crime so as to provisionally attach their property. The property was, in fact, acquired after obtaining loan of Rs. 59.90 crores from the bank on 24.10.2016, while the property was purchased on 28.10.2016. The purchase of the property was out of the loan and thus could not have been considered to be out of the proceeds of crime. The respondent erroneously taken loan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment of his employee P. Eswar Reddy, S V Chalam and Pavan Kalyan. Their statements were recorded u/s 50 (2) of the Act of 2002 to ascertain the facilities provided by Shri Praveen Kumar Kommineni and his entities for LC discounting services. In their respective statements, Sh. S V Chalam and Sh. Pavan Kalyan inter alia, confirmed that documents related to LC discounting were being prepared in the office of Kommineni group for its clients. The statement aforesaid have been relied in ignorance of the statement of the appellant. He was not involved in commission of crime rather to facilitate the process of LC facilities. The appellant had charged commission @ of 0.25% of LC value which could not have been considered to be proceeds of crime and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e respondent vehemently contested the appeal. The elaborate arguments were made which would be referred while recording finding in reference to the argument of the appellant to avoid repetition of facts and for the sake of brevity. Finding of the Tribunal: 10. The brief facts pertaining to the case has been given in the opening paras of the order which shows involvement of M/s RE Cables and Conductors Pvt. Limited for commission of offence under IPC and PC Act. It is along with the bank officials. The amount involved therein was found to be of Rs. 74.48 crores which was further calculated with interest. We are presently concerned with the appellants and not with M/s RE Cables and Conductors Pvt. Limited and accordingly deal with the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant as well as for the beneficiaries. M/s RE Cables and Conductors Pvt. Limited had availed the credit facility from the banks on accommodated transactions without underlying business activity. It was facilitated by Shri Praveen Kumar Kommineni, resulting in devolvement of the LC, which put the financial institution in loss. 13. The facts aforesaid were revealed in the statements of P. Eswar Reddy, S V Chalam and Pavan Kalyan, who confirmed that the documents related to LC discounting were prepared in the office of Praveen Kumar, which was subsequently admitted by Shri Praveen Kumar Kommineni also and for which he charged 0.25% on the LC value. It is further admitted that he had received an amount of Rs. 68,78,834 towards commission on a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of 2002 was sufficient to fortify how and in what manner the property was purchased. It is coupled with the fact that the payment of EMIs was made by cash deposited in the bank account to be transferred to the bank loan account without disclosing the source of the cash, and therefore, Shri P. Eswar Reddy finally admitted that the property belongs to Shri Praveen Kumar Kommineni but exists in his name. 16. The facts aforesaid are relevant because, even after analysis of the bank loan statement, the respondents found that repayments were made by the sources of Shri Praveen Kumar Kommineni by depositing cash on different dates. The appellant could not explain the source of the cash used for repayment of the loan amount. It was tabulated i....