9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (10) TMI 278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsuant to the information received from a reliable source, that one Shri Jaikishan Jainani, staying at Flat No. C-1, Vishwgeet Building, Four Bungalows, Andherl (West), Bombay, was indulging in illegal purchase and sale of foreign exchange, the business premises of Shri Jainani were searched on 6-4-1987. The search resulted in the recovery and seizure of the foreign exchange amounting to US $ 500 from his cash box. Statement of Shri Jainani (Appellant) was also recorded on the same day who stated that he purchased US $ 2,300 at the rate of Rs. 14.50 per US Dollar from an unknown person and that he sold US $ 1800 out of the said amount to a person known by the name 'Lucky' for Rs. 26,500. In view thereof, memorandum No. T-4/180-B/DD/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d brought back the said amount. My stay abroad was arranged by my relatives (as per Passport xerox copy attached). I took out the said 500 US $ and showed it to the Enforcement Officer who seized the same. 3. The Adjudicating Officer did not accept the above explanation and held the appellant guilty of having contravened the provisions of sections 8(1) and 8(2). 4. I have heard the counsel of each of the parties and have perused the record of the case. 5. The counsel for the appellant submitted that the confessional statement was obtained by threat which was later on retracted by the appellant vide his reply to the show-cause notice, that the Assessing Officer was wrong in holding the appellant guilty merely on the basis of a retracted conf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Rs. 250, the burden of proving that the foreign exchange came to his possession lawfully shall be on him. It is stated by the appellant that the seized amount of US $ 500 was the FTS amount. A perusal of the photo copy of the passport of the appellant indicates that the FTS amount of US $ 500 was issued to the appellant in TCs on 22-8-1986 whereas the amount recovered and seized from the appellant on 6-4-1987 was in cash. The appellant has not produced certificate indicating conversion of TCs into cash nor has he given any reason as to why he could not produce such a certificate. Further, retraction was too late. It appears to be rather after-thought as it was made in reply to the SCN and there does not exist any convincing reason as to w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udication order reveals that the accused was involved in money spinning racket. Therefore, this would appear to be adequate reason for confiscating the seized amount. In other words, confiscation of the amount of US $ 500 appears to be legally in order. 10. As regards the quantum of penalty, it may be stated that the penalty imposed on the appellant appears to be on higher side. Keeping in view the fact that the appellant is a physically handicapped person and also the fact that the charge under section 8(2) is not established against the appellant, it would appear to be Justifiable to reduce the penalty amount of Rs. 4,000 to Rs. 500. 11. In the light of the above, findings of the Assessing Officer as regards the charge under section 8(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
