9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Tribunal for Foreign Exchange is delivered by O.P. Nahar, Chairperson. Pursuant to this appeal the appellant has challenged Adjudication order No. DD/MAS/35/2003(VS), dated 23-4-2003 passed by Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement imposing a penalty of Rs. 50,000 against the appellant for contravention of provisions of section 9(1)(c) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manner except by acknowledgement of a debt in favour of the alleged donor and that is why the impugned order has been passed against the appellant stating that she must have acknowledged that debt in favour of non-resident Indians. Learned counsel cited judgment and order passed by Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board in Ram Mohan Kapoor v. Director of Enforcement A&C LR 32 page 522 and by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned order it is quite clear that there is no verbal or documentary evidence against the appellant except that she has received certain amount from Shri Joseph Paikuttu and Shri Haridas. The appellant has not been charged for receiving the amount but the charge is for acknowledging the debt in favour of two foreign residents. Merely because there is a grave suspicion the adjudication order could n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ible to draw an irresistible conclusion which is incompatible with innocence of the appellant so as to complete the chain. It is well settled that in case of circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and in case there is any missing link therein, the same cannot form the basis of conviction. For the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that prosecution has failed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
