9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Appeal maintainability 2. Reduction of penalties Detailed Analysis: 1. Appeal Maintainability: The judgment discusses the issue of whether the appeals filed before the High Court are maintainable. The counsel for the Central Government argued that no appeal could be maintained unless a question of law was involved. However, the court referred to Section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, which allows appeals to the High Court only on questions of law from decisions or orders of the Appellate Board. The court emphasized that the exercise of judicial discretion in imposing penalties involves questions of law. Citing previous cases, the court held that the present appeals involving the quantum of penalty and the exercise of judicial discretion are entertainable by the High Court. Therefore, the court found the appeals maintainable based on the legal provisions and precedents. 2. Reduction of Penalties: The judgment addresses the issue of whether the penalties imposed by the Appellate Board needed to be reduced. The court noted that both the Deputy Director of Enforcement and the Board had agreed that there were no mala fide intentions in the transactions and that they did not represent any money-spinning adventure. The Board had already reduced the penalties against the husband and wife. However, the appellants argued that a more significant reduction was warranted considering the circumstances. The court agreed with the appellants and decided to further reduce the penalties. The court reduced the penalty imposed on the husband from Rs. 4,000 to Rs. 2,000 and on the wife from Rs. 2,000 to Rs. 1,000, considering the quantum involved and the personal role of the wife in the affair. Ultimately, the court partly allowed the appeals by reducing the penalties as deemed just and proper based on the facts and circumstances presented before the court.
|
