9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubsequently the appellants have filed an application for additional ground. These applications were heard on 06.09.2018. The learned counsel for the appellant made the following points: i. That after passing of the impugned order dated 18.05.2018, the appellants were able to repatriate back to India, the entire foreign exchange that it had remitted under the ODI scheme (overseas direct investment). This was pursuant to the sale of their property in UK by the step down subsidiary by a contract of sale dated 08.06.2018. The foreign exchange was repatriated back on 28.06.2018. He relied on the Axis Bank, Vadodra, Gujarat Branch, statement of account from 25.06.2018 to 29.06.2018. ii. That as per Section 37(A)(4) proviso, if "at any stage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the seizure to be set aside. 3. In response, the learned counsel for the respondent stated that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to get into new issues which the impugned order had not dealt with. He also drew attention to the Seizure Order No. 01/2017 dated 08.12.2017 wherein the seizure was done on the basis of an investigation. He further stated that Section 37(A)(4) clearly mentions that the seizure order passed by the Competent Authority will continue till the disposal of adjudication proceedings and hence the appellants will have a chance to represent their case with regard to the subsequent developments, subsequent to the passing of the order dated 18.05.2018 by the Competent Authority before the Adjudicating Authority. Moreover, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etent Authority or the Adjudicating Authority as the case may be, where an application has been made by the aggrieved person disclosing the fact of bringing back the foreign exchange, foreign security etc. into India to pass an appropriate order as it deems fit including setting aside of the seizure made under Sub-Section 1 of Section 37(A). The sub-Section 1 authorizes the authorized officer to seize value equivalent situated within India. In the present case, the provisions of sub- Section 1 of Section 37(A) has led to the issue of seizure order 01/2017 dated 08.12.2017, which was confirmed by the impugned order dated 18.05.2018. A reading of the proviso would therefore make it clear that the CA or Adjudicating Authority has the power to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
