9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Appeal filed for setting aside default judgment and restoration of appeal. 2. Alleged contraventions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Acts. 3. Appeal against penalties imposed by the Appellate Board. 4. Competency of appeal under Section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. 5. Interpretation of the amount payable by the foreign buyer in export transactions. Analysis: 1. The appellant filed an appeal to set aside a default judgment and restore the appeal, which was allowed after a petition was filed. The appellant, a coir exporter, had appointed a Commission Agent for exporting coir yarn. The Enforcement Directorate issued show cause notices alleging contraventions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Acts in relation to export realizations. The Deputy Director imposed penalties, leading to an appeal before the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board. 2. The appellant contended that the prices mentioned in correspondence were inflated, and the real export value was as per the agreement with the foreign firm. The Appellate Board found the appellant's explanation unconvincing, referring to established norms in the export business. The Board reduced the penalties imposed, leading to a further appeal before the High Court challenging the Board's decision. 3. The appellant argued that the authorities wrongly found the export proceeds based on correspondence instead of the actual contract price. The Court noted that non-repatriation of the full amount payable could constitute a contravention. The Court referred to a previous decision highlighting the significance of over-invoicing and non-repatriation in such cases. 4. The Court addressed the competency of the appeal under Section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. The appellant argued that the question of the amount payable by the foreign buyer was a question of law, but the Court disagreed, stating it was a question of fact. The Court upheld the revenue's objection regarding the appeal's competency. 5. The Court analyzed the interpretation of the amount payable by the foreign buyer in export transactions. It noted that the authorities had chosen one alternative against the appellant based on available evidence. The Court found no question of law involved, as the authorities' conclusions were based on factual assessments. The Court upheld the findings against the appellant, emphasizing the conservation of foreign exchange resources. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the penalties imposed by the Appellate Board. The Court emphasized the importance of conserving foreign exchange resources and interpreting the law to serve this purpose. The judgment highlighted the significance of factual assessments in determining contraventions of foreign exchange regulations.
|
