Advertisement
In this episode of Prop Personalities, we sit down with Hars...
Luxury real estate is one of the most talked-about segments ...
Welcome to Prop Personalities by Prop News Time - a podcast ...
Airports play a much bigger role than just enabling travel -...
Why does the same hotel brand operate multiple properties in...
The PMLA Appellate Tribunal has provided major relief to developer Avinash Bhosale by setting aside most of the Enforcement Directorate's asset attachments in the Yes Bank DHFL case. While properties worth over INR 163 crore were earlier attached, the tribunal retained only around INR 25 crore linked to specific transactions. It found that several deals examined by the ED were older and not directly connected to the alleged offence. The case relates to Yes Bank's INR 3,700 crore investment in DHFL and the alleged diversion of funds through multiple entities.
The Appellate Tribunal under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act has set aside a significant portion of the Enforcement Directorate's attachment of assets belonging to Pune-based developer Avinash Bhosale in connection with the Yes Bank DHFL matter, while allowing a limited portion to remain. Advertisement
The ED had issued a provisional attachment order in 2022 covering assets worth over INR 163 crore. These included a high-value duplex apartment in Mumbai estimated at around INR 102.8 crore, land parcels in Pune valued at INR 14.65 crore and INR 29.24 crore, and additional land holdings in Nagpur.
Following review, the tribunal cancelled most of these attachments and allowed only assets worth about INR 25 crore to remain under attachment. The retained assets include a Pune land parcel held by Samit Realty valued at around INR 14.65 crore and a Nagpur land parcel worth about INR 15.52 crore registered in the name of Bhosale's wife.
The tribunal noted that there were valid grounds to interfere with the ED's order in most instances. It examined whether the attached properties could be directly linked to proceeds of crime and found that such a connection was not established for a large number of transactions cited by the agency.
The case originates from alleged financial irregularities linked to Yes Bank's investment of about INR 3,700 crore in DHFL through short-term debentures. Investigating agencies have alleged that funds were routed through entities associated with developer Sanjay Chhabria and later transferred to Bhosale and his companies.
According to the ED's investigation, around INR 431 crore was transferred to Bhosale, his family members, and related entities. A portion of this amount was treated as suspected proceeds of crime, forming the basis for the attachment action.
Bhosale's legal representatives argued that the transactions under scrutiny were part of legitimate business arrangements, including a loan agreement dating back to 2014 and consultancy-related dealings. They stated that these transactions were independent and not connected to the alleged offence that triggered the money laundering proceedings.
The tribunal accepted this argument to a large extent. It observed that several transactions examined by the ED had taken place well before the alleged offence period. It further noted that these transactions were not part of the original FIR or the Enforcement Case Information Report, raising questions on the agency's jurisdiction to examine them.
It was also observed that the investigating officer had extended the scope of the probe by linking earlier commercial dealings to the alleged offence without sufficient legal basis. This lack of direct linkage led to the setting aside of most attachments.
At the same time, the tribunal upheld attachments worth around INR 25 crore, indicating that certain transactions, including a later financial transfer, could not be fully justified and required continued scrutiny under the law.
The broader Yes Bank DHFL case has seen multiple enforcement actions over time. Key individuals, including Yes Bank founder Rana Kapoor and DHFL promoters Kapil and Dheeraj Wadhawan, have been investigated in connection with alleged financial misconduct involving loan approvals and fund diversion. The matter continues to be examined across agencies and courts.
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
