TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1076
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....P-PMLA- 5276/MUM/2024 Exemp. FPA-PMLA- 2450/MUM/2024 - -<br>PMLA<br>JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI (CHAIRMAN) AND SHRI GOPAL CHANDRA MISHRA (MEMBER) For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Sandeep Khairwal, Advocate, Mr. Nishant Yadav, Advocate and Mr. Arjun Kakkar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Pankaj Pandey, Advocate, Ms. Vartika Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Mayra, Advocate ORDER By a batch of these appeals, a challenge has been made to the order dated 12.08.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the provisional attachment of the properties vide order dated 28.02.2024. Brief facts of the case: 2. It is a case where based on several complaints, FIRs were lodged against M/s Kamla Group of companies and its sister conce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his family members to illegally enter into a partnership firm, namely, M/s Kamla Landmarc Builders. The additional flats were constructed above the 7th floor up to the 12 floors without proper authorization and Shri Jitendra Jain transferred his ownership rights to Shri Pravath Shetty to conceal his identity as the real owner of the building. Finding involvement of the accused in commission of crime and proceeds of crime in their hand, the respondent provisionally attached the properties to the tune of Rs.15.29 Crores, much below the proceeds of crime. The Provisional Attachment Order has been confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority and aggrieved by the order, these appeals have been preferred. Arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellants said to be involved even in proceeds of crime, thus, there was no reason to confirm provisional attachment of their properties. The bona fide purchase of the properties was shown in the reply to the show-cause notice issued by the Adjudicating Authority. The respondent has failed to properly scrutinize in order to verify as to whether funds used in the property were derived from a legitimate source or not and therefore the prayer was made to the Adjudicating Authority to deny the confirmation of the provisional attachment order but it was ignored and therefore impugned order deserves to be set-aside. 9. Ld. Counsel for the appellants did not raise any other arguments than referred to above. It is despite an opportunity to rais....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Sell. The title of the flats has not been passed to the appellants. It is for the reason that the construction has not been completed but since the appellants have transferred the amount of consideration, the provisional attachment of the flats has been questioned. The issue aforesaid was contested by the respondent threshold and it is submitted that the appellants are not bona fide purchaser of any of the properties, rather, they are instruments to layer the proceeds, otherwise, after entering into the Agreement to Sell for purchase of properties, there was no reason for the appellants to accept return of the money paid as advance and that too in many cases it was substantial amount. The fact aforesaid would be reflected from the statemen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t for payment of loan at the time of Agreement to Sell. If it was out of the loan, the consideration has been largely returned back and in all the cases, rather in the case of Shri Umesh Shetty, the refund of amount is in excess to the payment made by him. The aforesaid fact was suppressed by the Ld. Counsel for the appellants while advancing argument and otherwise no justification could be given to make a claim of the flats for which amount paid as advance was received back to a great extent. 13. The challenge to the provisional attachment of the flats is to save M/s Kamla Group of Industries and does not seem to be for their own benefit. Otherwise, the Agreement to Sell was entered long back and it was never pursued for Registration of....