TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 223;s remand order of 16.11.2007 also casts shadow on his intentions except that he appears to be trying to delay the decision. On merits as discussed above, his 3 statements which are voluntarily and the investigations done by the Customs brings out the offence as well as his involvement. A decided in Vinod M. Chitalia vs. UOI [2012 (5) TMI 157 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] the investigations done under Customs Act, can be used for the purpose of FERA/FEMA also, as the transaction in this case also is the same. The court further held that “in assessing these findings, the Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that clandestine transaction of the nature involved in the present case, are within the peculiar knowledge of persons such as the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder certain Bill of Ladings but he had received foreign exchange remittances from M/s. Amar Traders, Dubai M/s. Gem Trading Company, Dubai. 3. This case was earlier adjudicated vide the adjudication order dated 22.06.2001 against which the Appellate Tribunal vide its order dated 16.11.2007 in appeal No. 413/2001 had remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication after providing copies of the relied upon documents afresh to the appellant. Hence, the present proceedings. The adjudicating authority in the present proceedings vide the impugned order dated 16.12.2013 have recorded that a fresh set of documents was again sent to the appellant vide their office letter dated 03.04.2008. In the appeal, the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellants are not denying that they have received the same. But on merits they are not relying on those documents before the tribunal. This only shows that the appellant is only trying to delay the decision. They argued that the adjudicating authority has given them a number of occasions to appear for personal hearing but it was the appellant who did not avail of the same. They drew attention to the para in the adjudication order wherein it is recorded that fresh personal hearing was fixed on 12.05.2008, 22.07.2008 and the noticee Shri Suresh Jumani requested for adjournment of eight weeks on account of to locate and pursue the relevant documents pertaining to the case for the period 1993- 95. Considering this request, further hearing was f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s exports to claim the benefits under the DEEC scheme. The investigation by the Customs Authority have established these cases. The appellant has given his statement thrice taken by the ED officials on three occasions wherein he had admitted that no exports had actually taken place and he was doing these fictitious exports to (a) get foreign exchange remittances and (b) to obtain benefits under the DEEC scheme. The whole case of the appellant before the tribunal is non-observance of principles of natural justice. They have not denied the facts, except stating that his statements were taken under coercion and that he had retracted them. During the hearing they were asked to produce the certified copies of retraction, for which they sought so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ier but they are not acknowledging the same but not disputing the same either. The tribunal‟s direction on remand was therefore fulfilled way back in 2008 and the government is under no obligation to forward the set of documents again and again to the appellant who has not appeared before the adjudicating authority when the case was fixed for hearing on a number of occasions right from 2008 onwards as recorded in the adjudication order and reproduced at para 4 supra. They are only relying on one notice dated 06.12.2013 fixing the hearing for 16.12.2013 stating that they had not been indicated the time for hearing, and hearing fixed for 09.11.2013 which was purportedly a second Saturday and therefore a holiday. But they are silent on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860......... Therefore there is no prohibition in relying upon statements made under the Customs Act for the purpose of the adjudication proceedings under FEMA.......... Hence inference can be drawn from the above that the investigations done under Customs Act, can be used for the purpose of FERA/FEMA also, as the transaction in this case also is the same. The court further held that in assessing these findings, the Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that clandestine transaction of the nature involved in the present case, are within the peculiar knowledge of persons such as the appellant who are parties to those transactions. The burden which is cast upon the adjudicating authority to esta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
