Back
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY
MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CJ, G. C. MISHRA, Member
Yogesh Narayan Rao Deshmukh – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of fraud and misappropriation in the case. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. arguments regarding misinterpretation of property legality and timing. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. court's examination of proceeds of crime and definitions thereof. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. clarifications on legal definitions and consequences of actions taken. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 5. conclusion on the validity of the provisional attachment order. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
FINAL ORDER
12.01.2026
By this appeal under Section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (in short `the Act of 2002’), a challenge has been made to the order dated 08.02.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the Provisional Attachment Order dated 03.06.2021. So far as the appellant is concerned, his eleven properties were provisionally attached.
Brief facts of the case:
2. It is a case where an FIR was registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Mumbai Police for the offence under Section 120-B, 467 and 471 IPC against M/s National Spot Exchange Ltd. (M/s NSEL) and its Directors apart from key officials of the company, 25 defaulters and others. The FIR was registere
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
