TMI Blog1987 (7) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foreign exchange, namely drafts, traveller's cheques and currencies in U.S. $ and pound sterling of the value of U.S. $1,040.0 and 4,000.3 along with some letters and foreign goods. These documents and currencies were taken into custody and a list was prepared. The respondent was taken into custody by the Customs Officers and was produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kanhangad. Subsequently he was handed over to the officers of the Enforcement Directorate for investigation. On 18-8-1971 the respondent had given a statement before the Superintendent of Central Excise Customs Preventive. He stated that he was a car driver and the seized car was owned by him. He used to take passengers from Kasaragod to Bombay and back ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings it was held that the respondent acquired the foreign currency of $ and shown in the list dated 18-8-1971 without the permission of the Reserve Bank and so he contravened the provisions of Section 4(1) of the FERA, 1947. Therefore under Section 23(1)(a) of FERA, 1947 a penalty of ₹ 50,000 was imposed on him. The seized goods were also confiscated under Section 23(B) of the said Act. In the appeal filed by the respondent before the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board this order was set aside. The order of the Appellate Board is being challenged in this appeal. 2. Learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel, Sri P.V. Madhavan Nambiar, submitted that under Section 10(j) it was for the respondent to explain the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... words acquire and otherwise acquire have been considered correctly in Kuppuswami Chettiar v. State and P.K. Renguntawar v. Dy. Director Enforcement (51 Company Cases 163). As per the latter decision the words otherwise acquire imply positive possession and capacity for appropriation with regard to the item of property . According to learned counsel, the only evidence in these proceedings is the statement of the respondent dated 18-8-1971. Therein he only stated that the goods were handed over to him by strangers, to be handed over to some person at Modern Pharmacy at Kasaragod. He further stated that he did not examine the packages and did not know what they contained. His only obligation was to carry the goods and he was definite that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
