TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1837
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uash the aforesaid show cause notice dated 26.10.2017 and also to set aside and quash the complaint proceeding being OC.No.836/2017 pending before the Adjudicating Authority under PMLA, 2002. 3. This court by an order dated 28.11.2017 stayed the further proceeding of OC No. 836/2017. In the meantime, the respondent Enforcement Directorate had filed the connected I.A., being IA(C) 155/2021, for the vacation of the aforesaid interim order as well as the subsequent interim order dated 22.06.2018 passed by this Court in IA(C)/2276/2018. IA (C) 2276/2018 was filed praying for a stay of execution of summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate. 4. As agreed to by the learned counsels for the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal instead of taking the IAs. Since the E.D. has filed its pleadings touching the merit of the writ petition, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 5. The brief fact as projected by the petitioner is that while the petitioner was serving as Secretary to the Government of Assam, Irrigation Department, it was alleged that he had committed an offence under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. An amount of Rs. 42,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... III. According to Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned Senior Counsel, such action is therefore, a result of absolute non-application of mind inasmuch as there cannot be any reasonable belief that the amount will be transferred/concealed or may be dealt with by the petitioner when admittedly, the amount seized is not under custody of the petitioner but under the custody of the Investigating Authority. Therefore, the initiation of the proceeding itself has no legs to stand. 8. Per contra, Mr. R. Dhar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Enforcement Directorate argues: (i) The argument raised by the learned Senior Counsel Mr. Bhattacharyya had already been answered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhury & Ors -Vs- Union of India and Others reported in (2022) SCC Online SC 929 and it was held that issuance of show cause notice under Section 8 of the PMLA, 2002 would not violate the right of a person under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India. (ii) The provisional attachment order dated 29.09.2017 being not under challenge in the present writ petition, the legality and the validity of such attachment order may not be adjudicated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is only to collect information or evidence in respect of proceeding under this Act. V. The person so summoned is bound to attend in person or through an authorized agent and to state truth upon any subject concerning which he is being examined or is expected to make a statement and produce documents as may be required by virtue of sub-section (3) of Section 50 of the 2002 Act. VI. Summon is issued by the Authority under Section 50 in connection with the inquiry regarding proceeds of crime which may have been attached and pending adjudication before the Adjudicating Authority. In respect of such action, the designated officials have been empowered to summon any person for the collection of information and evidence to be presented before the Adjudicating Authority. VII. At the stage of recording of statement for the purpose of inquiring into the relevant facts in connection with the property being proceeds of crime is, in that sense, not an investigation for prosecution as such; and in any case, there would be no formal accusation against the notice. VIII. In such a situation, at the stage of issue of summons, the person cannot claim protection un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dering and confiscated by the Central Government: Provided that where a notice under this sub-section specifies any property as being held by a person on behalf of any other person, a copy of such notice shall also be served upon such other person: Provided further that where such property is held jointly by more than one person, such notice shall be served to all persons holding such property. 2. The Adjudicating Authority shall, after (a) considering the reply, if any, to the notice issued under sub section (1); (b) hearing the aggrieved person and the Director or any other officer authorised by him in this behalf; and (c) taking into account all relevant materials placed on record before him, by an order, record a finding whether all or any of the properties referred to in the notice issued under sub-section (1) are involved in money-laundering: Provided that if the property is claimed by a person, other than a person to whom the notice had been issued, such person shall also be given an opportunity of being heard to prove that the property is not involved in money-laundering". 14. On a bare reading of Section 8 o....