9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Imposition of penalty on a company for contravention of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. 2. Appeal against the adjudication order seeking reduction of penalty. 3. Competency of an ex-director to file an appeal on behalf of a company. Analysis: 1. The judgment pertains to a common appeal against an adjudication order imposing a penalty on a company for contravention of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. The company failed to realize an outstanding amount from an export transaction, leading to the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 2,50,000 on the company and Rs. 50,000 on the then director. The other director was exonerated from the charge. 2. During the hearing, the appellant's representative sought a reduction in the penalty amount. The appellant argued that mitigating circumstances, such as political and administrative changes in the export destination country, led to non-realization of the outstanding amount. The appellant contended that the penalty was excessive and there was no wilful neglect on the part of the director. The appellant requested a reduction in the penalty amount and submitted documentary evidence to support the plea. 3. The respondent did not oppose the reduction of the penalty but objected to completely exonerating the director. The respondent argued that the company acts through its directors, and the liability of the company is attributed to the acts of its directors. The respondent highlighted the director's delay in taking action to realize the outstanding amount. 4. The Tribunal reserved the case for the final order and later observed that the appeal filed on behalf of the company was not maintainable as it was signed by an ex-director without proper authorization. However, the Tribunal considered it fair to proceed with the appeal filed by the ex-director individually. After considering the submissions, the Tribunal reduced the penalty on the ex-director to Rs. 5,000, taking into account the circumstances and the fact that the company had also been penalized. 5. The appeal filed on behalf of the company was rejected as not competent, while the appeal on behalf of the ex-director was partly allowed, reducing the penalty to Rs. 5,000. The ex-director was granted 30 days to pay the reduced penalty amount, failing which the respondents were authorized to recover the amount in accordance with the law.
|
