9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 645X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hallenged adjudication order No. DD/MAS/36/ 2003(VS) dated 23-4-2003 passed by Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement imposing a penalty of Rs. 15,000 against the appellant for contravention of provisions of section 9(1)(c) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 for the reason that the appellant acknowledged debt of Rs. 1,50,000 in favour of one George Joseph, resident of Saudi Arabia a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat debt in favour of non-resident Indian. Learned counsel cited judgment and order passed by Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board in Ram Mohan Kapoor v. Director of Enforcement 32 A C LR 522 and by Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange in S.K. Mittal v. Director of Enforcement 45 S CLR 52. Per contra Shri T.K. Gadoo, DLA argued that the appellant is not related in any manner to Shri Geor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant except that she has received certain amount from Shri Joseph. The appellant has not been charged for receiving the amount but the charge is for acknowledging the debt in favour of a foreign resident. Merely because there is a grave suspicion, the adjudication order could not have been passed without collecting some evidence. That is a case of no evidence. The grave doubt without proof cannot l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s well-settled that in case of circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and in case there is any missing link therein, the same cannot form the basis of conviction. For the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against all the accused persons, much less the appellant. 4. In this position further di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
