TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellant must pre-deposit 50% penalty to appeal FERA violation; failure to comply led to appeal dismissal.</h1> <h3>Ramesh Kumar Verma Versus Enforcement Directorate, Mumbai</h3> Ramesh Kumar Verma Versus Enforcement Directorate, Mumbai - TMI Issues:Whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in directing the appellant to pre-deposit 50% of the penalty imposed for violation of FERA to entertain the appeal on merits.Analysis:The case involved the appellant remitting a substantial amount outside India without genuine imports, based on forged documents. The appellant's statement detailed the modus operandi behind the illegal remittances, implicating the appellant in orchestrating the scheme through fictitious firms and bank accounts. The Adjudicating authority found no genuine imports, concluding a violation of FERA provisions. The appellant failed to demonstrate financial hardship or retract the incriminating statement during the appeal before the Tribunal.The appellant's counsel argued that the case relied solely on the unretracted statement, but failed to produce evidence of retraction before the authorities. The court noted that the Adjudicating authority had recorded no retraction, and the appellant did not challenge this fact or provide the alleged retraction to the Tribunal. Consequently, the court upheld the Tribunal's order for the appellant to pre-deposit 50% of the penalty for the appeal to proceed on merits, extending the deposit deadline by eight weeks.In conclusion, the court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the necessity of the pre-deposit for hearing the appeal on merits. No costs were awarded in the judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
