RASHMI CEMENT LIMITED Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a private limited Company, has challenged (i) the registration of ECIR No.07/2012/KOL/PMLA dated 18.04.2012 whereby commission of offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter called the Act) was prima facie found to have been made out for initiating detailed investigation under the Act; (ii) the original complaint No.78/2017 dated 13.06.2017 filed by the Joint Director of the Enforcement Directorate, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, which has been lodged as per the provisions of sub Section (5) of Section 5 of the Act before the Adjudicating Authority at New Delhi; (iii) the show cause notice dated 21.06.2017 issued by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 8(1) of the Act for their appearance before the Adjudicating Authority on 11.08.2017 and (iv) the provisional attachment order in the above related ECIR dated May 23, 2017 whereby the immovable assets/properties in the form of lands, valued collectively to the tune of Rs. 8,45,73,643/- and movable assets/properties in the form of amounts lying in different bank accounts to the tune of Rs. 62,21,020/- totaling to Rs. 9,07,94,663/- which was assessed to be the value of proceeds of crime in terms of Section 2(1)(u) of the Act, have been attached.

(2.) However, during the course of arguments, the challenge has only been limited to the issuance of the show cause notice dated 21.06.2017 by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 8(1) of the Act as being unnecessary and a prayer has been made to stay the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority on the ground that the very initiation of the proceedings under the Act is unwarranted and per-se illegal.

(3.) The show cause notice dated 21.06.2017 issued by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 8(1) of the Act inter-alia states that on the basis of the complaint filed under Section 5(5) of the Act, the Adjudicating Authority has reasons to believe that the petitioner has committed an offence under Section 3 of the Act or is in possession of proceeds of crime being the property derived or obtained as a result of criminal activities relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property and as such the petitioner was called upon to indicate the source of the income, earning or assets out of which or by means of which the petitioner acquired the properties attached under Section 5(5) of the Act and the evidences on which it would rely and other relevant information and particulars and show cause as to why all or any of such properties should not be declared to be the properties involved in money laundering and be confiscated by the Central Government and the attachment order be not confirmed.