TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 658
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting Authority confirming the Provisional Attachment Order dated 08.04.2024. The provisional attachment was caused for immovable properties of the appellant, finding their involvement in money laundering. Before we refer to the arguments of the respective parties, it would be relevant to give brief facts of the case: Brief facts of the case: 2. It is a case where an FIR No. 30/2021 was registered on 15.02.2021 against Aamir Khan and others under sections 420, 406, 409, 468, 469,471 and 34 of the IPC at Park Street Police Station, Kolkata. It was alleged that funds were collected from public through E-Nuggets Mobile application on an assurance of higher returns by making illicit use of accounts at Federal Bank branches in Kolkata. C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere funneled to key beneficiaries of the fraud. Funds in crores were channelized through 147 bank accounts and finally deposited into five specific Aamir Khan's bank accounts, including those of Javrian Technologies and accounts maintained by Khan at Federal Bank. 4. Another FIR No. 284/2022 dated 05.10.2022 was registered against the accused persons at Hare Street Police Station, Kolkata. The Chargesheet No. 178/2022 dated 26.12.2022 was filed after investigation. It was alleged that the complainants were enticed by way of online ads for the E- Nuggets app promising easy earnings. They were further induced by providing high returns initially, however the app eventually became non-functional and the invested money was lost. The FIRs were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Authority, appellant has preferred the appeal raising factual and legal issues. Arguments of counsel for the appellants 7. The counsel for the appellant submitted that the property is on lease. It has no right over the property. The respondent has passed the impugned order without application of mind. In the light of the aforesaid impugned order deserves to be set aside. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that 2nd FIR registered in 2022 has been quashed and thus, the proceedings emanating from the same including the attachment proceedings under the Act of 2002 deserve to be quashed. He submitted that no role has been discussed qua the appellant in the 1st FIR registered in 2021 and it was only the 2nd FIR registered in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nitially only for the purpose of boosting confidence and encourage investment in larger amounts. The public was defrauded by wiping off the user data and diverting the funds invested by public into different bank accounts. About 300 bank accounts were identified in connection with the scam for the purpose of laundering the invested money. 13. FIR No. 284/2022 dated 05.10.2022 was registered at Hare Street Police Station, Kolkata and in consequence, chargesheet was also filed after thorough investigation. The complainants had alleged that they were lured into investing money in the E-Nuggets app by way of online ads thus, promising high returns and eventually led to all the invested money being wiped off. The invested money was laundered ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of crime and has rightly been attached. Even if the argument of the appellant is accepted that it does not have any right in the property, it could not be explained why the challenge to the provisional attachment of the property has been made except that the appellant company is enjoying the property. Thus, the ground taken by the appellant cannot be accepted and interference in the impugned order is not warranted in light of the discussion made above. 16. The counsel for the appellant further argued that FIR No. 284/2022 dated 05.10.2022 has been quashed thus, the proceedings under the Act of 2002, do not sustain and all the proceedings emanating from the said FIR deserves to be set aside. We find that two sets of FIRs were registered ....