9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Violation of FER Act, 1973 - Sections 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) Admissibility of retracted confessional statement Corroboration of confessional statement with recovered documents and witness statements Denial of opportunity for cross-examination Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, New Delhi was against an adjudication order imposing a penalty under sections 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of the FER Act, 1973. The appellant was alleged to have received and made payments of Indian currency on instructions from a person residing outside India. The appellant did not contest the appeal, and it proceeded ex parte. The main allegation was based on incriminating documents recovered during a search, where the appellant admitted to receiving and making payments as per instructions. The appellant later retracted the confessional statement, claiming it was made under duress, but failed to provide evidence to support this claim. The Tribunal cited a Supreme Court case stating that a retracted confession can be relied upon if found to be true and corroborated by other evidence. In this case, the confessional statement was corroborated by recovered documents and witness statements, leading to the rejection of the appellant's argument regarding denial of cross-examination rights. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the adjudicating officer's findings, confirming the impugned order. The appeal was dismissed on merits, and the appellant was directed to deposit a penalty within 15 days. Failure to comply would result in the respondent recovering the penalty in accordance with the law.
|
