Categories: Other Courts

Delhi HC Quashes Penalty on PayPal, But Upholds Compliances Under PMLA

The Delhi High Court on Monday, quashing the penalty of Rs 96 lakh imposed on the PayPal by the Financial Intelligence Unit India (FIU-IND). However the Court upheld that PayPal must comply with the obligations under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

PayPal had challenged the order imposing the penalty, arguing that it should not be considered a ‘payment system operator’ as defined under the PMLA. The company maintained that it only provides a technological interface for export-related transactions between Indian exporters and overseas buyers, without directly handling funds.

The court noted that PayPal’s case was based on the assertion that it does not engage in the actual handling of funds, as the transmission of funds occurs between Authorised Dealer Category-1 Schedule Commercial Banks in the transaction chain. PayPal also relied on the Reserve Bank of India’s stand, which had affirmed in separate proceedings that it is not a payment system operator.

Senior counsels representing PayPal argued that the definitions of ‘payment system’ in both the Payments and Settlements System Act 2007 and the PMLA are identical, with minor distinctions.

On the other hand, FIU-IND’s counsel contended that the purpose and scope of the PMLA differ from the PSS Act. While the PSS Act is a financial regulatory statute, the PMLA deals with fiscal offenses and illicit financial flows.

The High Court ultimately ruled in favor of PayPal, quashing the penalty while affirming its status as a ‘payment system operator’ under the PMLA, obliging the company to comply with reporting entity obligations.

As a result of the court’s decision, PayPal’s Bank Guarantee was discharged, and further steps were requested to be taken by the Registrar General of the Court in light of the judgment. The case sheds light on the complex regulatory landscape governing financial transactions and money laundering in India.

Ashish Sinha

-Ashish Kumar Sinha -Editor Legally Speaking -Ram Nath Goenka awardee - 14 Years of Experience in Media - Covering Courts Since 2008

Recent Posts

Wrestlers Sexual Harassment Case: Victim’s 8-Hour Cross-Examination Concludes

The Rouse Avenue court has recently completed the recording of a statement from one of…

4 mins ago

SC Forms SIT To Probe Animal Fat Claims In Tirupati Laddus

The Supreme Court on Friday has established an independent special investigation team to investigate allegations…

20 mins ago

Defamation Case: “Raut Didn’t Take Care & Caution, Caused Complainant Agony”- Mumbai Court

A Mumbai court has convicted Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut in a defamation case…

18 hours ago

1984 Anti-Sikh Riots Tytler Case: Delhi Court Records Statement Of Lakhvinder Kaur

The Rouse Avenue court on Thursday recorded the emotional testimony of Lakhvinder Kaur, widow of…

18 hours ago

Satyendar Jain Says Probe In Money Laundering Case Incomplete, Seeks Default Bail In Delhi HC

Former minister Satyendar Jain, currently in jail, urged the Delhi High Court on Thursday to…

18 hours ago

Tirupati Laddus Row: SC To Hear Pleas Seeking Court-Monitored Probe On Oct 4

The Supreme Court is set to hear a series of petitions on Friday regarding the…

19 hours ago