Court affirmed BCCI's status under Foreign Exchange Management Act, dismissing challenge to Section 42

The court upheld the impugned proceedings, dismissing the writ petition challenging the applicability of Section 42 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act to BCCI. Previous judgments affirming BCCI's status as falling under the Act's definition of 'person' were cited, leading to the rejection of the petitioner's contentions. The court emphasized the settled nature of the jurisdictional issue and declined to interfere, finding no merit in the petitioner's arguments. The writ petition was dismissed without costs imposed on either party.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging impugned proceedings under Rule 4(3) of Foreign Exchange Management Rules, 2000. Applicability of Section 42 of Foreign Exchange Management Act to BCCI. Jurisdictional issue regarding show cause notice to petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition to quash proceedings issued by the Special Director, Enforcement Directorate, concerning a jurisdictional objection under Rule 4(3) of the Foreign Exchange Management Rules, 2000. The petitioner, as the Honorary Secretary of the BCCI, highlighted the BCCI's role in promoting cricket in India and organizing events like the IPL. The issue arose from transactions related to IPL-2 held in South Africa, leading to a complaint under the Foreign Exchange Management Act. The petitioner argued that BCCI, being a society registered under Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, is not a body corporate and thus not covered under Section 42 of the Act. However, the second respondent rejected these contentions, citing a Bombay High Court judgment affirming BCCI's status as a company for the Act's purposes.

Regarding the applicability of Section 42 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act to BCCI, the petitioner contended that being a registered society, BCCI does not qualify as a company under the Act. The petitioner relied on legal precedents to support this argument. However, the court was not persuaded by these arguments, noting that a similar issue was raised and decided against the BCCI President in a previous Bombay High Court judgment upheld by the Supreme Court. The court emphasized that the definition of 'person' in the Act is inclusive, encompassing entities like BCCI and the IPL Governing Council. As the issue was settled by previous judgments, the court declined to interfere with the impugned proceedings, dismissing the writ petition.

In conclusion, the court upheld the impugned proceedings, emphasizing the settled nature of the jurisdictional issue regarding the application of Section 42 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act to the BCCI. The court found no merit in the petitioner's arguments, given the previous judgments affirming BCCI's status as falling under the Act's definition of 'person.' Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with no costs imposed on either party.

---