Remittance dispute required RBI response before adjudication, leading to remand for fresh consideration and hearing

An adjudication concerning a disputed remittance could not be sustained because the adjudicating authority had not obtained the Reserve Bank of India's response before deciding the matter. The record indicated that the RBI had not rejected the request and was still considering it, so the authority was expected to consult the RBI, particularly because the proceedings originated from information received from that source. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration, with directions to obtain the RBI's response and pass a fresh speaking order after giving the appellants an opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order could be sustained without obtaining the Reserve Bank of India's response on the disputed remittance and whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The remittance dispute turned on the availability and effect of the Reserve Bank of India's approval or response regarding the excess amount. The record showed that the Reserve Bank of India had not rejected the request and was still considering the matter. In these circumstances, the adjudicating authority ought to have consulted the Reserve Bank of India before passing the order, especially since the matter originated from information received from that authority. A fresh decision was therefore necessary after obtaining the relevant response and giving the appellants an opportunity of hearing.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the original authority for obtaining the Reserve Bank of India's response and for passing a fresh speaking order after hearing the appellants.

---