9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Appeal against penalty for contravention of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973; Petition for waiver of pre-deposit; Condonation of delay in filing appeal; Dispute over limitation for filing application; Verification of documents filed by the appellant; Remand for fresh adjudication; Consideration of all evidence by Adjudicating Officer.
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board, the appeal is against an adjudication order imposing a penalty for contravention of section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The appellant also filed a petition for waiver of pre-deposit. The appellant sought condonation of delay for filing the appeal, which was allowed by the Chairman. The respondent argued that the application for condonation of delay was not maintainable as it was not filed together with the memo of appeal as required by the rules. However, the Chairman held that the rule in question was directory and not mandatory, thus allowing the application for delay and entertaining the appeal. The appellant contended that the contravention of section 18(2) was not made out as the goods were not delivered to the foreign buyer due to being destroyed by Government authorities. The appellant claimed to have possessed the related documents but failed to furnish them as he was unaware of the requirement. The respondent suggested verifying the documents filed by the appellant and proposed remanding the case for fresh adjudication, to which the appellant had no objection. The Chairman noted that there was no evidence of receipt of goods by the foreign buyer and observed a mixup in the consideration of evidence by the Adjudicating Officer. Consequently, the Chairman directed the case to be remanded for fresh adjudication to consider all evidence properly. The Chairman waived the requirement of pre-deposit and set aside the impugned order, remanding the case for fresh adjudication. The appellant was granted the liberty to present all evidence again before the Adjudicating Officer, who was instructed to determine the charge based on the evidence regarding the delivery of goods and realization of export proceeds. The appellant was directed to appear before the Adjudicating Officer on a specified date for further proceedings.
|
