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>High Court quashes criminal proceedings against company under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act</h1> <h3>ITC Limited Versus Sri S.K. Mukherjee, Enforcement Officer, Enforcement Directorate</h3> The High Court of Calcutta allowed a revisional application under section 482 Cr.P.C., quashing criminal proceedings against a company under sections 56 ... - Issues involved: Revisional application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the legality and propriety of criminal proceeding u/s 56 and 68 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.Summary:The High Court of Calcutta, in a revisional application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., addressed the challenge to the criminal proceeding against a company under Sections 56 and 68 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The proceeding was initiated based on a complaint alleging international commodity trading transactions without lawful authorities. The petitioner argued that the complaint had lost relevancy as departmental proceedings on identical charges had absolved all involved parties. A comparative chart was presented, showing discrepancies between the petition of complaint and the departmental proceedings. The court noted that the departmental proceeding concluded that the charges were based on presumptions and surmises, not meeting the legal requirements. Consequently, the court found that continuing the criminal proceeding would be an abuse of the legal process, as there was no chance of proving the charges under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. The revisional application was allowed, the proceeding was quashed, and the petitioner was discharged.The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Syamal Kanti Chakrabarti presided over the case. The legal representatives for the petitioner and the opposite party were Mr. Anindya Mitra, Mr. Bhaskar Sen, Mr. Joymalya Bagchi, Mr. Kaushik Gupta, and Mr. Maloy Kumar Singh, respectively. The court heard arguments from both sides before reaching its decision.An urgent photostat certified copy of the order was directed to be provided to the parties upon application.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
