2018 (9) TMI 1150
Order passed u/s 37(A)(3) of FEMA, 1999 - Competent Authority (CA) has confirmed the seizure of mutual funds as equivalent to US 16,00,000 held outside India by the appellant - whether as per Section 37(A)(4) proviso, the seizure can be set aside which was confirmed by the impugned order dated 18.05.2018? - Appellate Tribunal s power - Held that - CA or Adjudicating Authority has the power to deal with this seizure order only, and not review its ....... + More
2018 (9) TMI 933
Charge under Regulations 8, 9 & 13 of the Foreign Exchange Management (Export of Goods and Services) Regulations, 2000 and Regulations 3(1) and 3(2) of Foreign Exchange Management (Manner of Receipt and Payment) Regulations, 2000 read with Section 42 of FEMA, 1999 - Bill of Lading (B/L) relevancy - Held that - Two sets of documents available for the same shipment under the same B/L nos. While the appellants have claimed one to be genuine, the....... + More
2018 (9) TMI 932
Contravention of the provisions of the FERA Act - accepting interest free security deposit of 65 lacs from the branch office of M/s DNV located in Mumbai, as the Regional Manager of M/s DNV had taken up the flat bearing no. No.24 on 20th floor, Kanchanjunga Mumbai for 36 months which belonged to Appellant s brother and sister-in-law and who had signed a Power of Attorney dated 21.05.1987 in favor of Appellant - Held that - It appears from the rea....... + More
2018 (9) TMI 669
Jurisdiction under FEMA v/s FERA - appeal lies to the Special Director (Appeals) or Deputy Director - appellant stated that as the appeal was filed under FERA before FEMA came into existence, the appeal should be heard by the Tribunal as under FERA there was no such provision for appeals going to the Special Director (Appeals) - Held that - As decided in the case of Premier Limited vs. Union of India 2006 (7) TMI 326 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY .in Se....... + More
2018 (9) TMI 193
Penalty u/s 50 of erstwhile FERA, 1973 for violation of the provisions - non service of the show cause notice upon the appellant prior to 1st June, 2002 under FEMA, 1999 - Held that - The Adjudicating Officer was obliged to examine the steps taken by the respondent before concluding that the appellant did not comply with the obligation of producing exchange control copies. He ought to have appreciated that a show cause notice or letter of enquiry....... + More
2018 (9) TMI 192
Guilty of contravention of Section 16(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - failure to realize amount receivable by them from M/s. Erman Electro Echnik (M/s. EEE) during the period 1990-91? - Held that - Dy. Director, Enforcement Directorate failed to appreciate that such statement ought not to be relied upon, unless there is independent corroboration of certain material aspect of the said statement, through independent sources is pre....... + More
2018 (8) TMI 365
Adjustment of penalty from the frozen amount and FDR - review petition - Held that - At no point of time, did the Enforcement Directorate either seize them or confiscate them so that they could be forfeited to the Central Government. The adjudicating authority has released these amounts from being frozen, by not confiscating them. - This money belongs to the appellant/his son, and while directions for freezing was only a temporary measure, the ad....... + More
2018 (7) TMI 1224
Allegation against the appellant Jaswinder Singh as contravened Sections 9 (1) (d) of FERA - payments of ₹ 2.85 Crore to persons in India on behalf of persons residing outside India - Held that - In any event, the case of the department is improbable on the face of it as the allegation of the department that the appellant indulged in hawala business is falsified from the fact that the said diary allegedly contains the details of the payment....... + More
2018 (6) TMI 1491
Offence under FEMA - Person deemed to be guilty of contravention alleged against AEL. - Sh. Rajesh S. Adani resposibility for the conduct of business of AEL - Held that - Letters and conduct goes to show that Sh. Rajesh S. Adani is covered u/s 42 of FEMA, 1999 being responsible for day to day affairs business activities of AEL as Managing Director. All the aforesaid actions of Sh. Rajesh S. Adani justified the findings in the impugned order there....... + More
2018 (6) TMI 677
Contravention of the RBI instructions - remittance for the one share of Mr. Leonid Beyzer had not come in as a foreign direct investment nor had it been made as a debit from his NRE/FCNR account maintained with an authorised dealer/authorised bank - Held that - The appellants are not disputing the charge but have stated that Mr. Leonid Beyzer had transferred the above remittances from his personal account to the account of the company i.e. M/s. T....... + More
2018 (5) TMI 1531
Violation of Section 3(a), FEMA - Penalty - Burden of Proof - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - amount received in foreign currency from unknown persons and same was spent when in India - Held that - It is settled legal principle that onus of proof, in both civil and criminal law, is on the person who wishes to prove a particular fact - There is no statutory provision in FEMA imposing reverse evidentiary burden upon an accused person, as....... + More
2018 (5) TMI 1530
Identity of the offender - appeal filed mainly on the ground that ED had booked a case against them on a wrong presumption and was a case of mistaken identity - Held that - it is clear that ED has not been able to prove that the appellant and Shri Farooque Memon, who seems to be the offender, are one and the same person. This is strengthened by the order of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Ahmedabad in the bail application. - All e....... + More
2018 (5) TMI 730
Proof of goods purchased by remitting the foreign exchange brought into India - offence under FEMA - Held that - The two consignments have been auctioned by the Customs/CWC as the appellant failed to clear the goods within the bond period and the authorities have recovered the customs duty and other charges payable on the two consignments. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appellant has failed to prove that the goods purchased by....... + More
2018 (5) TMI 729
Offence under FERA - Whether appellant had any knowledge or role in distribution of foreign exchange? - Held that - There is no allegation in the Show Cause Notice or the Adjudicating Order that Appellant either made any payment of any such foreign e....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 1342
Seizure of bank account due of the suspicion that foreign exchange was suspected to be held outside India in contravention of Section 4 of the FEMA, 1999 - Liberalise Remittance Scheme (LRS Scheme) - Exercise of powers conferred upon him in terms of the provisions of Section 37A(1) of FEMA, 1999 - Held that - The main error in the impugned order is that RBI scheme has not been discussed at all. The impugned order is totally silent about the schem....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 681
Violation of FERA - lending against the deposit without taking any primary security - Held that - Bank had lent money against the security of deposits in the NRNR accounts. There was no bar in such type of lending as is apparent from the RBI s Notification. The bank was required to comply with the condition attached to such lending as prescribed by the RBI under the FERA/FEMA. One such condition was that the bank could grant loan facilities to re....... + More
2018 (4) TMI 232
Stay petition - Held that - This is is an arguable case on merits and hence cannot also be stated to be prima facie in their favour. They are accordingly required to pre-deposit the penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs within a period of four weeks from today failing which the appeal shall be disposed off as per the provisions of FEMA.
2018 (3) TMI 1291
Appeal for non-compliance of pre-deposit of penalty - Held that - All the information provided proves that the conduct of the appellant/his counsel has not been very honest and they have tried to misguide the tribunal. That they have failed to file a review petition within a reasonable time is apparent from above, and are now coming up with some ground or the other. The judgements relied upon by the learned counsel of the appellant during hearing....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1250
Maintainability of Appeal under Section 19 of FEMA Act - Held that - Provisos to Section 19(1) of the Act, an appeal can be maintained/heard only when the issue of pre-deposit of penalty has been examined/addressed. - In the instant case, the conditions for filing Appeal has not been satisfied as no penalty has been imposed in the absence of an order . As the provisions laid down in Section 19(1) of the Act have not been fulfilled, the appeal fil....... + More
2018 (3) TMI 1136
Calling of witness Mr. Chokshi whose cross examination was already conducted on 20/09/2017 was rejected - Held that - It is the interest of justice, equity and fairplay, let Mt. Chokshi be further cross-examined on this aspect. The argument of the respondent has no forced that the appellant has covered entire case on 20.09.2017 if when the question of 41-45 were put to Mr. Chokshi. - Thus, the findings given in the impugned orders are contrary to....... + More
Search 
