9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Petitioner through his foreign currency accounts in the year 1974-75. The petitioner also seeks a writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction calling for the records of the case and after considering the legality, validity and propriety of the impugned notification dated 15th June, 1977 and of the impugned order dated 13th February, 1991 be pleased to quash the same. 2. A few facts now may be set out : Government of India had issued notification dated 25-9-1958 in exercise of powers conferred by section 9 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as Act ) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale to any authorised dealer against payment in rupees, at the rate for the time being authorised by the Reserve Bank in pursuance of sub-section (2) of section 8 of the Act for conversion into Indian currency of the foreign currency in which such foreign exchange is expressed. The order shall not apply amongst others to maintenance of, and operation of any account in foreign currency maintained outside India by foreign citizen in, or resident in, India but not permanently resident therein. By memorandum dated 4-3-1980 issued by the Additional Director, Enforcement Directorate and addressed to the Petitioner, it was brought to the attention of the Petitioner that during the year 1974-75, the Petitioner was now permanently residing in Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the appeal preferred by the Petitioner was dismissed. One of the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner before the Appellate authority was that the appellant was neither person residing in India nor foreign citizen permanently residing in India. The learned Appellate Tribunal held that whether the appellant was permanently residing in India or not at the relevant time is to be gathered from the surroundings facts and circumstances and thereafter recorded the finding that though the appellant was foreign citizen he was continuously residing in India since 1973 and permanently residing in India and on that count rejected the contention and confirmed the order which was subject-matter of the appeal. 6. It is this order which is su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as made retrospective effect is again devoid of any merit as show- cause notice was issued to the petitioner under Notification of 25-9-1958 as amended in 1974. Therefore, there is no question of notification of 1974 being made effective with retrospective effect. That contention must also be rejected. 9. Lastly it was contended that even assuming that Notification of 1958 was attracted yet, the petitioner would not fall within the notification as he was permanently residing in India. The issue whether the person is permanent resident would be a finding of fact. Both the fact-finding authorities below have recorded a finding of fact that petitioner was a permanent resident of India. This being purely a finding of fact cannot be interfer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
