9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (3) TMI 505X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C/80, dated 20-8-1981 and Notification No. F. 1/6/EC/80, dated 28-2-1986, of the Central Government. The stipulation of charges of these contraventions are stated in three show-cause notices which are numbered as SCN-I, SCN-II and SCN-III, all of the same date. 2. I have considered the submissions made by the parties. The respondents have sent a report on the financial status of the appellant. I find that there is nothing in this report to controvert the appellant's claim that she has no means to deposit the amount of penalty. I am, therefore, satisfied that it would cause undue hardship to the appellant if she is required to deposit the amount of penalty before her appeal is taken up for consideration on merits. I, therefore, waive the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pinion looking to the circumstances of the case as discussed by the learned Deputy Director, there is no justification for reduction of the penalty. The learned Deputy Director has already considered the fact that most of the amount came from appellant's own son and there was no indication of any racket in which the appellant was personally involved. He took a judicious view and did not confiscate the National Saving Certificates and the balance amount lying credited to the appellant's account. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order insofar as it relates to the charge contained by SCN-I. 5. Under SCN-II the appellant has been charged for acquiring a sum of US Dollars 50, without permission of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority and not before the investigating officer. It was incumbent of the learned Deputy Director to satisfy himself about the truth of the statement even if he found it to be voluntary. It would not appeal to reason that the appellant would remember in 1988 the total amount received by her from various foreign tourists for providing lodging to them in her house during the period of 5 years from 1981 to 1986, particularly in view of the fact that she did not maintain any record of such payments. It is to be noted that the burden is on the Department to prove the charge and in absence of any record of the foreign tourists who stayed in the appellant's house, the duration of their stay, the services, if any provided, and the payments m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
