9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal has been filed by Shri Ajit Singh Sandhu against the order passed by the Joint Director of Enforcement Directorate (ED), Order No. JD/JL/03/2014/GB dated 19.08.2014. A review petition has also been filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under Section 19 (6) of FEMA, 1999 against the same adjudication order. Briefly the case is, that a raid was conducted in the residence of Shri Ajit Singh Sandhu under Section 37 of FEMA wherein same documents and foreign currency of Euro 3525 and US Dollar 1251 was recovered which was duly seized. In a statement dated 14.03.2013, Shri Singh inter alia stated that he had six sons who were residing in Philippines for many years, that he was doing farming on his agriculture land in his village in India, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay i.e. on 14.03.2013 was Rs. 72,81,082.19 (Rupees seventy two lakhs eighty one thousand eighty two and nineteen paise). 3. The allegation is that all this money have been received from persons in India, other than through an authorised banking channel/dealer as prescribed by the RBI from time to time. The adjudication order imposed the following penalties: a. Rs. 50 lacs for contravention of Section 3(c) of FEMA b. Penalty of Rs. 30 lacs for contravention of Section 3 (b) of FEMA c. Penalty of Rs. 1 lakh for contravention of Section 3(a) of FEMA. 4. The adjudicating authority, however, withdrew the directions of freezing the bank account, as discussed at para 2 above, and did not order for its confiscation. He also did not order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ten lakh only). 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 adjudicating authority should have passed appropriate order of either releasing them or confiscating them. But he has mentioned that he is not confiscating them, meaning thereby that he is releasing them. Once no confiscation order has been passed it is not clear under which provisions of law the said amount was appropriated towards the penalty amount. Without going int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
