9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (12) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seized, culminating in the initiation of adjudicatory proceedings by the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate, Southern Zone, Madras-6 who in his order No. DD/MAS/182/86 dated 12-6-1986, holding the petitioner guilty of contravening the provisions of Section 9(l)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (for short FERA ), levied a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on her besides confiscating the sum of Rs. 15,000/- seized from her premises on the date of search with a direction for payment of penalty within forty five days from the date of receipt of the same. 3. The order in fact had been communicated to and received by the petitioner on 27-9-1986. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner exercised her option of preferring the appeal befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be fulfilled, once an option for preferring the appeal is exercised. The two conditions are :- (1) Penalty should have to be deposited; and (2) the appeal had to be filed within forty five days from the date of receipt of the order. 9. There is no manner of doubt whatever that the appeal had been preferred on 10-11-1986, as referred to earlier, which is very well within the period of forty five days, as the order relating to the adjudicatory proceedings had been communicated on 27-9-1986. 10. No doubt true it is that the penalty amount had not been deposited. It is not as if, learned Counsel would contend, that in all eventualities and situations, penalty amount should have to be deposited for the entertainment of the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a specified number is not by itself sufficient to indicate even by way of implication that the deposit of the penalty amount had been dispensed with and the appeal had been taken on file and if at all, in the circumstances it would indicate that a number had been assigned to the appeal for the purpose of conveniently referring the same in future correspondence. 13. In the absence of any order dispensing with the deposit of the penalty amount by the Board, the contravention amounting to an offence under Section 56 of the FERA gets fruitioned by the elapse of forty five days from the date of receipt of the adjudication order, which in fact happened in this case, as already adverted to, on 11-11-1986. In this view of the matter, the petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
