TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
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>Court grants petitioners liberty to challenge jurisdiction at preliminary stage, emphasizing importance of early jurisdictional issue resolution.</h1> <h3>Brij Mohan Khaitan And Ors. Versus Enforcement Directorate And Anr</h3> The Court allowed the application for exemption, granting the petitioners the liberty to challenge jurisdiction before the adjudicating authority at the ... Jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 51 of FERA 1973 - HELD THAT:- This Court, upon perusal of the paper book, is prima facie of the view that as the impugned order is only a show cause notice and that too of the year 2003, the ends of justice would be met if the petitioners are given liberty to raise the issue of jurisdiction at the preliminary stage before the adjudicating authority itself. The adjudicating authority is directed to decide the aforesaid preliminary issue. All rights and contentions of both the parties including the issue of delay and laches are left open. Issues Involved:Challenge to notice under Section 51 of FERA 1973 based on exclusion from criminal proceedings.Analysis:The petition challenges a notice issued under Section 51 of the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act, 1973 (FERA 1973). The petitioner's senior counsel argues that both criminal prosecution and adjudicatory proceedings are based on the accused being in charge and responsible for the company's business. The counsel highlights that the petitioners were excluded from the criminal proceedings on the same factual basis, contending that the notice under Section 51 of FERA 1973 lacks jurisdiction.Upon review, the Court notes that the impugned order is merely a show cause notice from 2003. The Court decides that justice would be served by allowing the petitioners to challenge the jurisdiction at the preliminary stage before the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority is directed to address this preliminary issue, leaving all rights and contentions, including delay and laches, open for both parties.In conclusion, the Court allows the application for exemption subject to exceptions and disposes of the present petition and application. The petitioners are granted liberty to raise the jurisdiction issue before the adjudicating authority, emphasizing the need to address this issue at the preliminary stage.
TaxTMI 
