Tax Management India. Com
        A knowledge portal that keeps us updated ...
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals News SMS Articles Highlights
        Home        
 
Case Laws
Home Case Index All Cases FEMA SC FEMA - SC This
Law
Court
Citation -
Landmark
Order by
 

 

FEMA - Supreme Court - Case Laws

Showing 101 to 118 of 118 Records

  • 1980 (9) TMI 270

    Whether there was any breach of the requirements of Article 22 clause (5) of the Constitution and Section 3, sub-section (3) of the COFEPOSA Act, for that is the breach which is claimed by the petitioner as invalidating the continued detention of the detenue? - Held that - The time of 12 days taken up by the Assistant Collector of Customs was therefore unreasonably long for which no explanation at all was forthcoming from the detaining authority........ + More


  • 1980 (6) TMI 115

    Whether the grounds of detention were couched in English, a language which the detenu did not understand at all and these grounds were not explained to him? - Held that - The service of the ground of detention on the detenu is a very precious constitutional right and where the grounds are couched in a language which is not known to the detenu, unless the contents of the grounds are fully explained and translated to the detenu, it will tantamount ....... + More


  • 1980 (2) TMI 257

    Whether the representation requesting the Central Government to order the revocation under S. 11 of the Act was not forwarded by the detaining authority to the Central Government and as such the detention is illegal? - Held that - It is clear that a representation properly addressed by the detenu to the Central Government was not forwarded to the Central Government and as such no action had been taken up to date. - As to what will be the conseque....... + More


  • 1980 (2) TMI 256

    Writ of Habeas Corpus for release of detentu - Held that - Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and explanation furnished by the detaining authority, we are of the view that the detaining authority failed to act with reasonable expedition in furnishing the statements and documents referred to in the grounds of detention. On the facts of the case, therefore, we are satisfied that the detention is not in accordance with the p....... + More


  • 1980 (2) TMI 255

    Whether the facts here disclose a disregard to the petitioner s constitutional right as claimed by his counsel in his second and third submissions? - Held that - There was no delay in furnishing of documents and no legitimate complaint could be made on that score. The detenu s representation was received by the detaining authority on December 26, 1979. Without any loss of time copy of the representation was sent to the Customs authorities for the....... + More


  • 1979 (5) TMI 146

    Validity of an order of detention challenged - Held that - It is amply clear from the record that the representation of the petitioner was not considered by the 1st respondent before he confirmed the order of detention. The 1st respondent thus failed to comply with the constitutional obligation imposed upon him under clause (5) of E Art. 22. The subsequent consideration and rejection of the representation could not cure the invalidity of the orde....... + More


  • 1978 (12) TMI 182

    Detention orders - Held that - Appeal dismissed. If the detenu wanted any more particulars such as the name of the intelligence officer or other information, he could have well asked for the particulars before making his representation. That he never did. It was not as if any privilege had been claimed by the Government in respect of the intelligence reports. In fact, we find that the intelligence reports were produced before the learned Judges o....... + More


  • 1978 (11) TMI 153

    Smuggling of Cargo of contraband goods - detention orders - Held that - It is quite clear from the facts set out in the grounds of detention, that the appellant was the person who was actually engaged in the act of smuggling of the contraband stainless steel rolls into the Indian customs waters. It is, therefore, clear that for all intents and purposes the appellant was the actual smuggler and not a mere abettor. Furthermore, the activities of th....... + More


  • 1978 (11) TMI 150

    Detenu release orders - Held that - Appeal allowed. Questions whether the confessional statements recorded on December 13 and 14, 1977 were voluntary statements or were statements which were obtained from the detenu under duress or whether the subsequent retraction of those statements by the detenu on December 22, 1977 was in the nature of an after thought, were primarily for the detaining authority to consider before deciding to issue the impugn....... + More


  • 1977 (2) TMI 135

    ... ...
    ... ... to provide for extension of time, but so long as the section stands as it is, it must be complied with by the Department. 2. Notice be issued to the Respondent to show cause why writ petition should not be admitted. No ex parte stay for the present.


  • 1977 (1) TMI 147

    Whether in view of the orders dated June 27, 1975 and January 8, 1976 issued by the President under clause (1) Article 359 of the Constitution, the petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution were maintainable? - Held that - Detenu in asking for their temporary removal from their places of detention to their homes to perform funeral ceremonies or to appear at any examination or to be taken to a doctor of their choice for social medic....... + More


  • 1976 (4) TMI 211

    Article 21 furnishes the guarantee of Lex , which is equated with statute law only, and not of jus - spheres of executive and legislative and judicial powers with regard to personal liberty and preventive detention........ + More


  • 1975 (3) TMI 59

    Whether section 23(1A) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 violates article 14 of the Constitution? - Held that - We do not think that there is any merit in the contention that the classification made in section 23(1A) is discriminatory. Even according to the respondents, it is the classification made in section 23(1)(a) which is under-inclusive and is, therefore, unreasonable. If this court were to declare that the classification made i....... + More


  • 1971 (12) TMI 107

    words considers it necessary - meaning of the word consider is to view attentively, to survey, examine, inspect (arch), to look attentively, to contemplate mentally, to think over, meditate on, give heed to, take note of, to think deliberately, be think oneself. to reflect ....... + More


  • 1970 (8) TMI 87

    Order of acquittal set aside - Held that - While imposing sentence a Court might take notice of the fact that a person is being vicariously punished for an offence and if he shows that it is possible that the contravention of the Act took place without his knowledge or neglect a sentence of imprisonment may not be imposed. In this case he was abroad at the time of contravention and it is possible that the contravention took place without his know....... + More


  • 1970 (8) TMI 83

    ... ...
    ... ... llowed and the judgment of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 211 of 1969 modified to the extent that the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment imposed on Girdharilal is set aside. The sentence of fine of Rs. 2,000/-shall, however, stand.


  • 1969 (7) TMI 109

    Whether s. 23(1)(b) of the Act is ultra rites Article 14 of the Constitution inasmuch as it provides for a punishment heavier and severer than the punishment or penalty provided for the same acts under s. 23(1)(a) of the Act? - Even if s. 23 ( 1 ) (b) is not void, the complaint in respect of the offences punishable under that section has not been filed properly in accordance with the proviso to s. 23-D (1 ) of the Act, so that proceedings cannot ....... + More


  • 1965 (10) TMI 63

    Whether s. 23 (1) (a), having, been substituted by the Amending Act XXXIX of 1957, would have retrospective operation in respect of the alleged offence, which took place in 1954? - Held that - 23(1) (a) prescribes a minimum penalty while under the old s. 23(1) the Magistrate had an option of fixing a fine less than the minimum prescribed under s. 23 ( 1 ) (a). But we are unable to agree with him that the new section prescribes any minimum. What i....... + More


....6
 
 
 
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.