APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY
Sapna Sureka – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement Kolkata – Respondent
FINAL ORDER
10.11.2025
By this appeal under Section 26 under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (in short ‘the Act of 2002), a challenge has been made to the order dated 09.11.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the Provisional Attachment Order dated 31.03.2021.
The learned counsel for the appellant referred to the CBI case registered on 31.03.2014 for the predicate offences against M/s Prakash Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Mr. Manoj Kumar Jain and others. The appellant was not named as accused though after recording ECIR in reference to the predicate offences, the appellant’s husband was named as an accused. The bank account of the appellant has been provisionally attached in the ignorance of the Income Tax Return (ITR) placed on record showing independent income of the appellant out of salary and other investments, thus, having sources for the aforesaid amount found in the bank account and has been provisionally attached.
The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the Impugned Order was passed after expiry of 180 days from the date of provisional attachment order and thus should have been declared to have been lapsed as per Section 5(3) of the Act of 2
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.