Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: appellate tribunal for foreign exchange new delhi Page 10 of about 156 results (0.132 seconds)

Jun 13 2001 (TRI)

P.S. Maniar, Mehta (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Director, Enforcement Direc ...

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. The appellants have sent a letter dated 31-5-2001 intimating that with their personal efforts, they have now received the payment against the outstanding amount of $ 6244 for the non-realisation of which penalty was imposed which is under challenge in these appeals. A copy of the relevant bank advice for the remittances from Uganda to the appellants account with Bank of Baroda Backbay Reclamation, Mumbai, is attached to the said letter. 2. In the appeal petition the appellants have stated that during the financial year ended 31-3-1998, they have exported goods aggregating to $ 1,97,521 to Uganda. On the basis of the XOS statement received through Bank of Baroda, New Delhi Stock Exchange, Mumbai, the appellant was found to have total export outstanding of Rs. 12,16,394. In reply to the show-cause notice, the appellants stated that they have been able to realise $ 7,950 against one of the outstanding GRs. The appellants have further stated that they are making efforts to realise the o...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 09 2000 (TRI)

S. Sukumaran Vs. Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. This appeal is directed against the adjudication order No. AO/178 of 1989, dated 30-10-1989 (in file No. T-4/56/TVM of 1989) under which a penalty of Rs. 7,500 has been imposed on the appellant for contravention of section 9(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act). 2. A perusal of the memorandum of appeal discloses that the appellant has not denied the allegation that he received an amount of Rs. 30,000 from his brother, Shri Madhavan, a resident outside India, in the manner violative of section 9(1)(b). However, he has explained the circumstances in which that an amount had to be received by him. It is seen from the record that the proceedings for disposal of appellants petition for waiver of pre-deposit had already been held on 18-2-1993 at Kochi. Under this Boards order of 29-3-1993 the appellant was directed to pre-deposit the entire amount of penalty of Rs. 7,500. 3. In the circumstances, and particularly in view of the facts constituting the contravention ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 2000 (TRI)

N.K.R. Arunachalam Chettiar Vs. Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

Sarvesh Chandra, Chairman. - This appeal has arisen out of the Adjudication Order No. SDE(R)IV/17/91, dated 24-7-1991 under which a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs has been imposed on the appellant for contravention of section 14 read with the Central Government Notification No. F.-1/3/PC/73, dated 15-6-1977, as amended by GSR No. 996, dated 6-7-1988 and Notification No. F. 1/25/EC/78, dated 21-5-1979. In addition to the penalty the appellant has been directed to close the accounts maintained by him in foreign banks within one month and repatriate the entire balance in those accounts. The appellant has since complied with the direction. This appeal is, therefore, directed against the imposition of the penalty. The appellant has also deposited the amount of penalty. This order disposes of the appeal on merits. 2. The appellant has filed an application seeking condonation of delay. Dr. Shamsuddin objected to the application on the ground that since the appeal has been received in the Board after ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1999 (TRI)

Hathihai Bulakhidas Vs. Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. These appeals are directed against Adjudication Order No. ADJ/5-B/DD/RAJ/95, dated 16-1-1995 under which a penalty of Rs. 90,000 has been imposed on the appellant-firm (appellant in Appeal No. 98 of 1995) for contravention of section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act). A further penalty of Rs. 25,000 has been imposed on the appellant in Appeal No. 99 of 1995 by invoking the provisions of section 68(1) of the Act as indicated in the memorandum of show cause in pursuance of which adjudication proceedings were held in this case. 2. These appeals were taken up for disposal on 13-10-1999 on the application of the appellants for early hearing. However, Shri R.B. Shah, Chartered Accountant, sent an application (which was registered in the Registry on 6-10-1999) seeking adjournment as he was proceeding abroad. The case was adjourned to 12-11-1999. Another application was received in the Registry on 8-11-1999 from the appellant, enclosing therewith a letter of Shri ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1999 (TRI)

Subramanian V. Iyer Vs. Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. This appeal is directed against Adjudication Order No. ADJ/128-133B/SDE/JMJ/92, dated 27-10-1992 (despatched on 30-6-1993) under which a total penalty of Rs. 95,500 has been imposed for contravention of certain provisions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 as mentioned in five Memoranda of Show-Cause (SCNs), all dated 17-3-1989. The impugned order has been made in pursuance of this Boards remand order of 29-11-1991 whereby the earlier adjudication order dated 21-1-1990 was set aside. Initially, the appellant had been served with six SCNs and held guilty of the charges framed under each of those SCNs for which a total penalty of Rs. 1,42,500 was imposed on him. On remand, the learned Adjudicating Officer has exonerated the appellant on the charge contained in SCN IV and sustained the charges contained in the remaining SCNs. After consideration of the evidence in respect of each charge, the learned Adjudicating Officer held the appellant guilty of the charges contained in SCNs I...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 1999 (TRI)

Kishore K. Valia Vs. Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. This appeal is directed against Adjudication Order No. ADJ/57/AD/RK/B of 1997 under which a penalty of Rs. 15,000 has been imposed on the appellant for contravention of section 9(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act). The allegation against the appellant is that he paid an amount of Rs. 96,217 (being the amount of difference between the value declared in the import documents and the value as assessed) to Karan Paul, Sales Executive of Jebsen and Jessen of Germany from whom the goods were imported. 2. The appellant has assailed the order on several grounds but in my opinion, it is not necessary to consider all those grounds in detail in view of the final order No. 606 of 1999, dated 22-3-1999 passed by CEGAT in Appeal No. C/337/93-A (Universal Synthetics v. Commissioner of Customs). My view is based on the considerations discussed hereinafter. 3. It is not disputed that the Bill of Entry filed by the appellant declares the value of the goods to be Rs. 42,658. H...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 1999 (TRI)

Siemance Engineers Dhansukhlal R. Vora V Ersus Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. The appellant has filed this appeal together with dispensation applica-tion, against Adjudication Order No. AdJ/161/AD/MHK/A of 1998, dated 13-11-1998. He has also filed an application seeking condonation of delay. The appeal in this case has been filed after 231 days from the date of the impugned order. Allowing sometime for postal delivery, it can be reasonably presumed that the appeal has been filed not earlier than the expiry of 221 days from the receipt of the impugned order. Under the first proviso to sub-section (2) of section 52 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act) this Board is prohibited from entertaining the appeal if the same has been filed after 90 days from the date of the receipt of the impugned order by the appellant. It is seen from the application for condonation of delay that the appellant has admitted that the appeal has been filed after six months of the receipt of the order. He has counted initial three months for filing the appeal and further...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 1999 (TRI)

Syed Shabbir Vs. Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. This appeal is directed against Adjudication Order No. DD/MAS/18/96 (MS), dated 18-12-1996 under which a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs has been imposed on the appellant for contravention of section 9(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act). The amount of penalty has already been recovered by the department from out of the seized amount of Rs. 2,80,000. This order disposes of the appeal on merits. 2. The allegation against the appellant is that he received an amount of Rs. 3 lakhs from his brother Syed Tajuddin, a person resident outside India. The allegation is sought to be substantiated by the evidence of the appellants statement dated 20-4-1999 and recovery of an airmail envelope which is addressed to the appellant and has been sent by Tajuddin. 3. The appellant has not denied that the said Tajuddin is his brother and that he is residing outside India. However, he has denied that he had received the amount of Rs. 3 lakhs from his non-resident brother as alleged by th...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 1999 (TRI)

P.R. Kumar Vs. Deputy Director of Enforcement

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. This appeal is directed against the adjudication order No. DD/MAS/10-12/97(SS) dated 31-3-1997 under which a penalty of Rs. 17,000 has been imposed on the appellant for contravention of section 9(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 ('the Act'). An amount of Rs. 1,70,000 seized from the appellant has also been ordered to be confiscated under section 63 of the Act. The appellant has deposited the entire amount of penalty of Rs. 17,000. This order disposes of the appeal on merit. 2. The adjudication proceedings in the present case were instituted by issue of SCN No. T-4/95/SZ/CITY of 1995, dated 26-7-1995 on the allegation that the appellant received an amount of Rs. 1,70,000 from a local person, other than the authorised dealer in foreign exchange, by order or on behalf of Ravi of Colombo, Sri Lanka, a person resident outside India. The allegations are sought to be substantiated by Mazahar dated 27-3-1995 of the search of the personal baggage of M. Taj Moulana, statemen...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 16 1999 (TRI)

Chhabra Handicrafts Vs. Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate

Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. These 5 appeals have arisen from a common Adjudication Order No. SK/DD/III/35 of 1992 dated 28-4-1992 imposing a penalty of Rs. 50,000 on the appellant-firm (Appeal No. 244 of 1992). Chhabra Handicrafts and Rs. 10,000 on each of the other 4 appellants (Appeal Nos. 245-248 of 1992) in their capacity as partners of the appellant-firm for contravention of the provisions of section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act) on account of non-realisation of amount of US $ 11,931.70 + US $ 6,337.04 totalling US $ 18,268.74 in respect of two GRI Nos. CA 393847 and CA 49421, respectively. As these appeals are filed against a common adjudication order passed on same facts, they are disposed of by this common order. 2. A Memorandum No. T-4/179/D of 1987 dated 23-7-1987 was issued simultaneously to all the appellants herein asking them to show cause as to why adjudication proceedings should not be held against them on the ground that Chhabra Handicrafts failed to realise the ...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //