9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE MR HARSHEEL D SHUKLA(6158) FOR THE APPLICANT MR VANDAN K BAXI(5863) MS PRACHITI V SHAH(9990) NANAVATI & NANAVATI(1933) FOR THE RESPONDENT ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE) 1. Heard Mr. Harsheel D. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Prachiti V. Shah, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This application is filed seekin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inability of the application. The attention of this Court was invited to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondents. The reliance was placed on Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (henceforth, "the FEMA Act"). It was submitted that the proviso to Section 35 of the FEMA Act clearly indicates that the High Court, if satisfies that the appellant was prevented by sufficient ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Our attention was also invited to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Union of India, through the Directorate of Enforcement vs. Ashok J. Ramsinghani reported in 2011 SCC OnLine Bom 575, wherein similar view has been taken by the court in a matter arising out of Section 35 of the FEMA Act. It was further submitted that the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble High Court o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Appellate Authority, which is filed almost after delay of 138 days i.e. beyond the period of outer limit of 60 days.
6. In view of the aforesaid expressive provision with regard to prescribed period curtailed for condonation of delay in the Act itself, the present application is held to be not maintainable. Hence, the present application stands dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
