Foreign exchange payment restrictions and abetment were established where non-resident credits were distributed in India, upholding penalties.

Restrictions on payments under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 were applied to transactions in India involving a non-resident, where credited amounts were paid by order of, or on behalf of, the non-resident entity and then distributed in India. Non-compliance with the conditions attached to Reserve Bank permission was treated as contravention under Section 49. The banker's role in opening and operating the account and crediting the amounts was found to be intentional aid, satisfying abetment in the statutory sense. The Tribunal therefore held that contravention and abetment were established and upheld the penalties.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants had contravened the restrictions on payments under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, and whether the banker-appellant had abetted the contravention, so as to justify the penalties imposed.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that the restrictions in Section 9 applied to any person in India, including transactions involving a person resident outside India. It found that the credited amounts were paid by order or on behalf of the non-resident entity and were thereafter distributed in India, bringing the case within Sections 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d). The Tribunal further held that the conditions attached to the Reserve Bank permission were violated and, by virtue of Section 49, such non-compliance amounted to contravention of the Act. As regards the banker-appellant, the Tribunal held that opening and operating the account and crediting the amounts constituted intentional aid, which satisfied the concept of abetment under the Act as explained with reference to Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Conclusion: The contraventions and abetment were proved, and the penalties were upheld.

---