9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Substitution of legal representatives of the deceased appellant - Clarification on the pre-deposit of penalties by the High Court - Contravention charges under various sections of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Validity of the findings of contravention based on appellant's statements and corroborative evidence - Reduction of penalties based on the nature of contravention and intention of the appellants Substitution of Legal Representatives: The appeals arose from penalties imposed on the appellants for contravention of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The legal representatives of the deceased appellant were substituted in the appeal proceedings, with Ms. Prasanthi Prasad representing them and filing necessary documents. Clarification on Pre-deposit of Penalties: The High Court directed the Board to consider the dispensation application of the petitioners within a specified time frame. Despite awaiting formal clarification, the Board proceeded to hear and dispose of the appeals on merits without requiring pre-deposit, understanding the High Court's intention. Contravention Charges: The appellants were penalized for contraventions under various sections of the Act. The adjudication proceedings involved show-cause notices and findings of guilt based on the appellant's statements and corroborative evidence regarding import of costly items from Singapore. Validity of Findings on Contravention: The appellant's counsel argued against the findings, highlighting discrepancies between the appellant's statements and documentary evidence. The Board concluded that the evidence did not support the contraventions alleged, setting aside some findings and reducing penalties based on lack of corroborative evidence. Reduction of Penalties: The appellants were found guilty of contravention under section 9(1)(c) but argued for a reduction in penalties. Ms. Prasad contended that the contravention was technical, with no loss of foreign exchange and unintentional violation. The Board agreed, reducing penalties significantly based on the nature of the contravention and the appellants' intentions. In conclusion, the Board partly allowed the appeals, setting aside some contravention findings and reducing penalties significantly based on the technical nature of the contraventions and the absence of detrimental impact on foreign exchange. The appellants were directed to pay the revised penalties within a specified timeframe to avoid further legal action for non-payment.
|
