2008 (8) TMI 1037

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -1990 passed by Additional Director, Enforcement Directorate imposing a penalty of Rs. 25000 against the appellant for contravention of section 9(1)(c) FER Act on the reasons that appellant acknowledged a debt of Rs. 3,91,592.44 creating a right in favour of one Sayyed Mohd. Sahibu a non-resident persons to receive the aforesaid amount. Despite notice the appellant is neither present nor represent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rieved by such order may (on payment of such fee as may be prescribed and), after depositing the sum imposed by way of penalty under section 50 and within 45 days from the date on which the order is served on the person committing the contravention, prefer an appeal to the Appellate Board : Provided that the Appellate Board may entertain any appeal after expiry of said period of forty five days bu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ences if arises therefrom. The statute cannot be recasted or rewritten by Tribunal on the face of the clear texture of Second Proviso. In this regard, reference can be made to the Apex Court judgment in Nasiruddin v. Sita Ram Agarwal [2003] 2 SCC 577. 5. The appellant has failed to make pre-deposit in compliance of order dated 30-5-2008 passed by this Tribunal. There is no bona fides in favour of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X