Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether section 12(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 applies to exports made under a firm contract of sale and whether non-repatriation of the full export proceeds attracted liability under that provision.
Analysis: The provision was construed in the context of the Act's object of conserving foreign exchange resources. The phrase "person entitled to sell or procure the sale of" was treated as descriptive rather than restrictive, so that the obligation under section 12(2) was held to extend beyond consignment sales and to cover completed sales under a foreign buyer contract. The Court preferred the view of the Madras High Court, and held that a literal construction suggested by the contrary view would unduly narrow the working of the statute in relation to foreign exchange control.
Conclusion: Section 12(2) applies to exports under completed sale contracts as well as consignment sales, and the appellant's non-repatriation of export proceeds constituted a contravention. The finding of liability and the reduced penalty were upheld against the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: A provision in foreign exchange control legislation governing repatriation of export proceeds must be construed purposively so as to advance conservation of foreign exchange, and the statutory expression identifying the person bound by the obligation is descriptive enough to include completed sales under export contracts.