9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 751X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 18(2) of FERA, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ); Rs. 10,000 on Shri Subhash Kapoor (appellant in Appeal No. 217/89) for contravention of section 18(2) read with section 68(1) of the said Act and Rs. 60,000 on M/s. Emkay Fashions (appellant in Appeal No. 233/89) for contravention of section 18(2) of the said Act. The above adjudication proceeding was initiated by issuance of two separate SCNs No. T-4/28-D/84(SCN.I) T-4/28-D/84(SCN.II) both dated 31-10-1984 to M/s. Emkay Fashions (P.) Ltd. and its Director including Shri Subhash Kapur (appellant in Appeal No. 217/89) and to erstwhile partnership firm M/s. Emkay Fashions and its partner Smt. Sushila Rani Malhotra, Smt. Satish Kapoor and Shri Suresh Malhotra asking the respecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f of the appellants that entire amount was realised before the adjudication proceeding was initiated against appellants but due to riots which took place in November 1984 all relevant records were burnt. However, despite specific order of this Tribunal dated 26-8-2002 no evidence could be brought on record except photo copy of one letter dated 10-11-1984 written to SHO, Karol Bagh Police Station. The said letter is self-created document and not supported by any other material evidence. The appellant also failed to produce any record in support of their contention of realisation of 14 GRs from their authorised dealer. As a result the contention of the appellant in this regard has no merit, and is liable to be rejected. 4. The appellants next ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neither taken any steps for filing suit for recovery of the dues against the foreign buyers nor they have filed any application with the competent authority for recovery of the dues against the foreign firms stated to have become bankrupt. The appellant has also not taken any steps for obtaining permission for write-off by the RBI. The appellants further contended that non-issuance of SCN to Shri Harish Malhotra, Shri Suresh Malhotra, Smt. Sushila Rani Malhotra and Subhash Kapur would amounts to violation of principles of natural justice in the light of decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of New Samundri Transport Co. (P.) Ltd. v. State of Punjab [1976] 1 SCC 757 and decision of Hon ble High Court at Calcutta in Charandas Malhotra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Handles Gmbh, Koln and M/s. Macau Import Export Ltd., London are none other but brother of Shri Harish Malhotra main partner of erstwhile partnership firm M/s. Emkay Fashions and Chairman of M/s. Emkay Fashions (P.) Ltd. i.e., the appellant in Appeal No. 233/89 and appellant in Appeal No. 215/89 respectively. Further it is not the case of the appellant that RBI has extended the period for realisations of the export proceeds nor it appears that any efforts have been made to obtain necessary permissions for write-off by the appellants. 7. In view of the above findings of the adjudicating authority does not suffer from any infirmity and irregularity. However, since the adjudicating authority decided not to impose separate penalty on individual ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
