2008 (7) TMI 1122 - AT - FEMA

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Adjudication Order imposing a penalty
- Non-compliance with the order for pre-deposit of penalty amount
- Lack of appearance or representation by the appellant
- Legal provisions regarding pre-deposit of penalty amount for filing an appeal

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal filed against an Adjudication Order imposing a penalty for contravention of provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The appellant, despite being directed to make a partial payment of the penalty amount within a specified period, failed to comply even after six months. The appellant did not appear or have any representation during the proceedings, indicating a lack of bonafide on their part. The legal provision under Section 52(2) of FERA, 1973, mandates the pre-deposit of the penalty amount for filing an appeal, unless dispensation is granted due to undue hardship. In this case, the appellant neither appeared nor informed the Tribunal about compliance with the order. The appellant's failure to comply, despite leniency shown by the Tribunal, led to the dismissal of the appeal. The judgment emphasizes the importance of following statutory requirements and timely compliance with judicial orders to proceed with an appeal.

The Tribunal highlighted the statutory obligation of appellants to file an appeal along with the penalty amount, unless dispensation is granted due to undue hardship. The appellant's non-compliance with the order for pre-deposit of the penalty amount was considered a condition precedent to proceeding with the appeal. Despite leniency shown by the Tribunal in dispensing with a portion of the penalty amount and providing sufficient time for compliance, the appellant failed to adhere to the judicial order. The lack of representation or communication from the appellant during the proceedings further demonstrated a lack of bonafide on their part. The judgment underscores the significance of adhering to legal requirements and complying with judicial orders to maintain the integrity of the appeal process.

The Tribunal, in accordance with the statutory scheme, dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's failure to comply with the pre-deposit requirement of the penalty amount. The appellant's lack of appearance or representation, coupled with the non-compliance with the judicial order despite leniency shown, led to the dismissal of the appeal. The judgment emphasizes the importance of upholding legal obligations and following procedural requirements to ensure the proper adjudication of appeals. The record of the appeal was directed to be consigned to the Record Room following the dismissal order.