Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1992 (6) TMI 191

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... indings of the Adjudicating Officer are based on voluntary statements of the appellants, the appeals are liable to be dismissed. 2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that pursuant to an information that one Shri Munisamy (appellant in Appeal No. 91 of 1987) had received a sum of Rs. 20,000 from Shri Murugesan, officers of the Enforcement Directorate interrogated Shri Murugesan (appellant in Appeal No. 90 of 1987) on 17-10-1986 who admitted before the officers that he had paid Rs. 20,000 to Shri Munisamy under the instructions from one Shri Srinivasan (a French citizen) residing at St. Paul Reunion. Thereafter, the officers also interrogated Shri Munisamy, who stated that he had received Rs. 20,000 from Shri Murugesan on 15-10-1986 and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Murugesan for violation of section 9(1)(d) vide Adjudication Order No. AD/MAS/ 13/87(SV) dated 8-1-1987. 5. Being aggrieved by the said order(s), the appellants have filed these appeals. I have considered the submissions of the parties and have perused the records of the case. I would now first discuss SCN III and, then, SCN II and SCN I. 6. SCN III. The allegation levelled against Shri R Murugesan (appellant in Appeal No. 90 of 1987) in this SCN is that he, a person resident in India, made a payment of Rs. 20,000 to Shri Munisamy, resident of Pondicherry, by order of Shri Srinivasan, resident of St. Paul Reunion, a person resident outside India, without the general or special exemption from the Reserve Bank of India and thereby contravened .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... saction and I acted only for and on behalf of Shri Srinivasan. I was not aware that I should take any permission special or general from the Reserve Bank of India for the payments of money belonging to Shri Srinivasan to his nominated person in India. A vital question which arises out of the above is whether section 9(1)(d) will not be attracted against a person who, acting as an agent, makes any payment out of his principal's monies to, or for the credit of, any person under instructions of his principal, resident outside India. Section 9(1)(d) provides that Save as may be provided in and in accordance with any general or special exemption from the provisions of this sub-section which may be granted conditionally or unconditionally by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m of St. Paul Reunion, a person resident outside India and thereby contravened section 9(1)(b). At the outset, it may be stated that Shri M. Sivaprakasam of St. Paul Reunion is the brother of Shri Munisamy (appellant). Shri Munisamy has admitted in his statement dated 17-10-1986 made before the Enforcement Officer and in his letter dated 13-12-1986 written in reply to the show-cause notice as well as in the written submissions filed by him that he received Rs. 20,000 from Shri Murugesan on 15-10-1986 under instructions of his brother, Shri M. Sivaprakasam of St. Paul Reunion and deposited the said money into the Savings Bank Account of Mrs. Sarojini, wife of Shri Srinivasan of St. Paul Reunion at Pondicherry on the same day. However. Shri M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... osited the said amount in the said account. He, however, maintains that he did not commit any contravention as the money belonged to Shri Srinivasan and was deposited by him in the account of Mrs. Sarojini, wife of Shri Srinivasan. This plea is not maintainable as family transactions including payment made to a lady on behalf of her husband residing abroad are not excluded from the scope of section 9(1)(a) under which a person is prohibited from making 'any payment to or for the credit of any person resident outside India'. The expression 'any person' occurring in that provision would also include family members including wife and husband. Therefore, the charge of contravention of section 9(1)(a) is established against the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates