Money laundering through real estate is one of the most widely utilized methods among the several that are utilized. The high value of real estate transactions is frequently used by criminals as a justification for their illicit gains.

2) in present case selling UG and PG seats in management quota and buying property with major black component  would be money laundering 

3) Property and records can be seized, frozen, and attached, even property acquired via illegal Any individual found guilty of money laundering faces a minimum sentence of three years in jail and a maximum sentence of seven years in prison.

4) Money laundering is defined as the process through which an illegal fund, such as black money, is obtained from illegal activities and disguised as legal money, eventually portrayed as white money. The money laundered is passed on through various channels or phases of conversions and transfers to make it legal and eventually reach a legally acceptable institution, like a bank.

5) repayment schedule can be a bonafide mistake by the NBFC and when confronted it has been rectified . extra money collected should be refunded to customer 

If the said ill gotten receipts are received in the above transactions then pmla will be applicable 

No it can’t absolve primafacie pmla will be applicable 

1)no case under PMLA is made out 

2) as far as AAP  is concerned 

3) The excise policy case is based on the 2021 liquor policy introduced by the AAP government aimed to reform the excise sector by privatising liquor stores and adjusting licensing criteria.

4) in said case allegations are that 

Rs 100 crore tis paid o top AAP leaders to get benefits of the new Delhi excise policy.

ED has claimed in the past that AAP leaders received kickbacks worth Rs 100 crore in the excise policy.

Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering.

Explanation:,—

(i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely:—

(a) concealment; or
(b) possession; or
(c) acquisition; or
(d) use; or
(e) projecting as untainted property; or
(f) claiming as untainted property,
in any manner whatsoever;

(ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever.

Therefore it can be included as an offence under the PMLA. 

"proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence, i.e., a property of any kind used in the commission of an offence under this Act or any of the scheduled offences;

The ED could look at adding AAP itself as an accused. This has crucial implications since a “company” under investigation by the ED could have its assets attached or confiscated. Section 70 of the stringent Prevention of Money Laundering Act deals with offences by companies.

The provision states: “Where a person committing a contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of any rule, direction or order made thereunder is a company, every person who, at the time the contravention was committed, was in charge of and was responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contravention and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.”

While a political party is not a “company” incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013, the provision has a crucial explanation that could bring a political party under the ambit of the anti-money laundering law.

Under this, a “company” means any body corporate and includes a firm or other association of individuals.