Effect of failure of ED to mention reasons in the show cause notice, against provisional attachment

Court :- High Court of Bombay , Citation :- Brizo Reality Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aditya Birla Finance Ltd.
This issue was before Hon’ble Mr. J. S.J. Vazifdar and Mr. J. A.K. Menon in the matter of Brizo Reality Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aditya Birla Finance Ltd.
 
This was a writ petition against the orders of the directorate of enforcement for the provisional attachment applicants’ property under the prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The order of ED stated that investigation was required to find the source the funds of M/s Aastha Minmet India Pvt. Ltd.
 
The writ petition was dismissed by holding that the High Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to quash the show cause notice or the provisional attachment order on the ground that show cause notice itself does not set out the reasons.
 
ACTS/SECTIONS USED:
 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 173
 
Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 147,148
 
Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 120B, 467, 471
 
Prevention Of Money-laundering Act, 2002 - Section 17, 18, 2(1)(u), 3, 5, 5(1), 5(5),8,8(3)
Connect With Us Social Media