Appeal rejected, order upheld for foreign currency confiscation under Customs Act & FEMA

The appeal was rejected, and the impugned order was upheld, confirming the confiscation of the foreign currency and the penalties imposed on the appellant. The adjudicating authority found no reason to interfere with the findings, as the appellant's actions were in clear violation of the Customs Act and FEMA provisions.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of the foreign currency export.
2. Confiscation of foreign currency.
3. Imposition of penalties.
4. Validity of the appellant's statements.
5. Applicability of Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and Customs Act provisions.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality of the Foreign Currency Export:
The appellant was intercepted at Jaipur International Airport while attempting to travel to Dubai with foreign currency valued at INR 8,73,622/- concealed in his baggage. The appellant did not possess any legal documents or approval from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) as required under Section 3 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, and related regulations. The appellant admitted that the currency was given to him by another individual for delivery in Dubai, indicating an attempt to smuggle the currency out of India in contravention of FEMA and Customs Act provisions.

2. Confiscation of Foreign Currency:
The foreign currency was seized under Section 110(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, based on the reasonable belief that it was being smuggled out of India. The adjudicating authority confiscated the currency under Sections 113(d) and 113(e) of the Customs Act, 1962, as the export of such currency without proper documentation is prohibited. The blue-colored trolley bag used for concealment was also confiscated under Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962.

3. Imposition of Penalties:
The appellant was penalized under Sections 114 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. A penalty equivalent to the value of the seized currency (INR 8,73,622/-) and an additional penalty of INR 20,000/- were imposed. The adjudicating authority found that the appellant had knowingly and intentionally attempted to export the currency illegally, rendering himself liable for penalties under the relevant sections of the Customs Act.

4. Validity of the Appellant's Statements:
The appellant's statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, were considered voluntary and without coercion. The appellant did not retract these statements, and they were deemed sufficient to form the sole basis of the conviction. The appellant's claim that the currency was his hard-earned money from working in Dubai was not substantiated with evidence, and his explanation for carrying the currency was found to be an afterthought.

5. Applicability of FEMA and Customs Act Provisions:
The export of foreign currency by an Indian resident is strictly regulated under FEMA and related regulations. The appellant's actions were in clear violation of these provisions. The adjudicating authority referenced multiple judgments from the Supreme Court and High Courts to support the confiscation and penalties imposed. The appellant's contention that there were no specific provisions prohibiting the carrying of foreign currency was dismissed, as the law requires strict adherence to the regulations governing the export of currency.

Conclusion:
The appeal was rejected, and the impugned order was upheld, confirming the confiscation of the foreign currency and the penalties imposed on the appellant. The adjudicating authority found no reason to interfere with the findings, as the appellant's actions were in clear violation of the Customs Act and FEMA provisions.

---