9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its approval on the Company s application for closure of the WOS and advised the Company to surrender its holding license, if issued, and to produce evidence of repatriation towards realization of equity investment. Therefore, some justification in reference to the facts of this case and the act of the appellant has been given though contested by the respondent. The facts aforesaid are relevant only for the purpose of considering the quantum of penalty otherwise the contravention of Section 6(3)(a) of the Act of 1999 and Regulations 5,6 and 13 of the Regulations, 2000 has not been contested Taking into consideration the overall facts which include the initial permission of RBI, we find penalty amount to be disproportionate and accordingly the penalty of M/s Tips Industries is reduced from Rs.70 lakhs to Rs.35 lakhs and for Shri Kumar S. Taurani, it is reduced from Rs.28 lakhs to Rs.8 lakhs. The reduction of the penalty is even looking to the amount involved and the reason of contravention. Accordingly, it would not be taken as an order on the proportionality groundbut the reduction of the amount is in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. We cause interference in the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sider the legal issues framed by the High Court in its order dated 27.09.2023. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the legal issues framed by the High Court are not applicable to the facts of this case and thus prayed for time to seek review of the order so that it may remain a case of remand simpliciter for consideration of all the issues. The time was granted to the appellant who said to have preferred a Review Application but could not pursue for a decision. 4. Looking to the delay occurring for disposing of the case, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that let the appeal be decided afresh and for that the appellant would not press a decision on the legal issues framed by the High Court, rather looking to the fact that the delay has already occurred, he would not even press the appeal in reference to the alleged contravention of the provisions of the Act of 1973, rather appeal would be pressed limited to the disproportionality of the penalty and accordingly prayer was made to decide the appeal limited to the issue of quantum of penalty. This Tribunal accordingly proceeds with the matter on the request of the counsel for the appellant. However, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the course of expansion of operation into USA and South Africa. For compliance with local legislations, Dashmesh International Ltd., New Jersey, Dashmesh International CA Ltd., California and M/s. Dashmesh International Music S.A. (Proprietary) Ltd. South Africa were incorporated on 04.02.2000, 19.05.2000 and 15.12.1999. (ii). DILM acquired the entire equity in Dashmesh International Ltd., New Jersey on 22.08.2001, Dashmesh International CA Ltd., California on 22.08.2001 and M/s. Dashmesh International Music SA (Proprietary) Ltd., South Africa on 01.08.2001. (iii). On 22.11.2001 the Reserve Bank of India, by its letter, granted the clearance to Company to make the investments and loan as aforesaid. (iv) On a query from the Reserve Bank of India, the Company, by its letter dated 18.04.2003 clarified the position in respect of the investments made by the Company in DILM and its step-down WOSs. It was explained that the omission to give particulars of the Step-down WOSs was unintentional and occasioned only for the reason that though the Company had disclosed the business plans of DILM, including the plan to set up shop in California, New Jersey and South Africa, the local laws i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty. 10. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and scanned the matter carefully. 11. The gist of the charge against the noticee company and the individual is that they had made investments in three step down subsidiaries in the name of Dashmesh International Music S.A., South Africa, Dashmesh International Ltd., New Jersey USA and Dashmesh International Ltd., California through its WOS i.e. Dashmesh International Ltd. Mauitious. The investments are said to have been made without permission of the RBI. It is a case where DashmeshInternational Ltd., New Jersey was incorporated on 04.02.2000 while Dashmesh International Ltd., California on 19.05.2000 and DashmeshInternational Music of South Africa was incorporated on 15.12.1999. 12. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the RBI vide its letter dated 22.11.2001 gave clearance to the appellant company to make the investments and for loan. However, it is a fact that subsequently vide its letter dated 18.04.2003, the Company had clarified the position in respect of the investments made by it in DILM and its step-down WOSs. It was explained that the omissions to give particulars of the step-down WOSs we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
