Appeal dismissed for gross abuse of process after multiple frivolous review petitions following Supreme Court rejection

The HC dismissed an appeal relating to FEMA penalty proceedings, finding it to be a gross abuse of process. Appellants had violated Section 18(2) of FERA by delaying receipt of export value beyond prescribed period. After SC dismissed their SLP, appellants filed multiple review petitions before the Appellate Tribunal instead of complying with the 10% pre-deposit requirement. The Tribunal dismissed these petitions. HC held that once SC had dismissed the SLP, no further proceedings could lie. The court deprecated appellants' conduct for misleading courts at every step and attempting to relitigate a matter already finalized by SC through selective document filing.

---

---

Issues:
The judgment involves the dismissal of a review petition by the Appellate Tribunal, challenging the penalty imposed under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) on the appellants for violations related to export transactions.

Issue 1: Challenge to Penalty Imposed
The appeal challenged the penalty imposed on the appellants for violating FEMA provisions related to export transactions. The penalty was initially imposed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 50 of the FERA, which was later reviewed by the Appellate Tribunal. The appellants argued that they lacked the financial capacity to make the required pre-deposit of the penalty amount, seeking complete waiver for filing the appeal.

Issue 2: Review Petition and Dismissal
After various legal proceedings and appeals, including a review petition before the Appellate Tribunal, the appellants continued to challenge the penalty. Despite previous dismissals and a final decision by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the appellants filed a review petition seeking to condone the delay in depositing the required amount. The review petition was ultimately dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal, leading to the present appeal.

Conclusion:
The High Court dismissed the present appeal, condemning the appellants' conduct as a gross abuse of the legal process. The Court criticized the appellants for misleading the courts at every step and attempting to reopen a matter that had been conclusively decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Court found the appeal devoid of merit and highlighted the appellants' selective filing of documents and attempts to mislead the court. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, emphasizing that no further proceedings were permissible after the matter had been settled by the highest court.

---