Back
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY
V. ANANDARAJAN, Member
J. B. Subramaniyam – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of relevant facts related to the case (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. appellants argue jurisdictional overreach regarding attachment (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 3. jurisprudence on proceeds of crime and burden of proof (Para 21 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. respondent counters appellants' arguments, including jurisdiction and linkage (Para 26 , 27 , 33 , 34) |
| 5. court's final reasoning on the attachment of properties (Para 38 , 45) |
| 6. final decision to dismiss appeals with no order as to costs (Para 46 , 47 , 48) |
FINAL ORDER
19 .03.2026
These appeals are directed against the order dated 24.07.2015 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (AA) established under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), in Original Complaint (OC) No. 438/2015 whereby the Ld. AA has confirmed the Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) No. 04/2015 dated 19.03.2015, attaching the properties of the appellants herein.
Facts in Brief
2. The relevant facts briefly are that based on a written complaint dated 12.02.2013 received from the Ministry of Defence, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered an FIR (RC-217/2013/A0003 dated 12.03.2014) against one Mr. Christian Michel James (hereaft
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
