9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 737X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Enforcement Directorate, New Delhi, in Order No. SDE (SSB)IV/19 & 20/2003, dated 29-8-2003. 2. Admittedly, the appeal was filed in time. However, the petitioner did not deposit a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- imposed against him as penalty. Along with the appeal, he filed an application under Section 52(2) of the Act seeking to dispense with such deposit on the ground that he does not have wherewithal to deposit the same and insisting for such deposit would cause undue hardship to him. It was also contended that there was no prima facie case against him. 3. Having considered all the above, the appellate tribunal passed the impugned order declining to dispense with the pre-deposit and directed the petitioner to deposit the penalty with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oppose this writ petition. According to him, though the petitioner was acquitted by the criminal court, it has got nothing to do with the proceedings under this Act for imposing penalty and confiscation. He would further submit that this proceeding is independent of the criminal prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner has got wherewithal to deposit the amount imposed as penalty. Therefore, the impugned order, according to the learned counsel, does not require any interference at the hands of this Court. 7. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the writ petition itself is not maintainable, in view of the fact that there is an alternative remedy of appeal available to the petitioner under Section 54 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 (221) E.L.T. 7 (S.C.) (Indu Nissan Oxo Chemicals Industries Ltd. v. Union of India) to contend that in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court should not interfere with any order regarding pre-deposit. 10. A close reading of the above said judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court would go to show that it has no application to FERA. That was a case where the Honourable Supreme Court expressed the view that the Court cannot order for dispensation of pre-deposit for preferring appeal under the Customs Act. Indisputably, under the Customs Act there is no power vested with the appellate authority to dispense with pre-deposit for entertaining an appeal, whereas under the FERA Act there is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... slightly brushed aside. 13. Having regard to the fact that the original impugned order of the Director is an ex parte order, having regard to the fact that a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- which has been seized by the department from the petitioner has been subjected to confiscation, having regard to the fact that there are no materials available on record to totally disbelieve the statement of the petitioner that he does not have wherewithal and there appears to be some truth in the claim of the petitioner and finally having regard to the fact that the petitioner is a chartered accountant by profession, and so, he must have some reasonable income, I hold that it would be in the interest of justice to pass a conditional order in favour of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
