Rebuttable presumption in export proceeds cases: pending write-off requests do not defeat liability for unrealised bills.

Export proceeds must be realised and repatriated within the prescribed period; if they remain unrealised, a rebuttable presumption arises that the exporter failed to take reasonable steps. Mere pendency of a request for write-off or extension before the Reserve Bank does not itself grant relief or rebut the presumption. Later realisation of some export bills may weaken the adverse inference, but the presumption may still stand for the remaining outstanding bills. On the facts, the contravention was confined to three unrealised bills, and the penalty was reduced accordingly.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant had rebutted the statutory presumption of failure to take reasonable steps for realization and repatriation of export proceeds in respect of the remaining unrealized export bills, and whether the penalty required reduction accordingly.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required the exporter to realize export proceeds within the prescribed period, failing which a presumption arose that reasonable steps had not been taken. That presumption was rebuttable, and the factual record showed that several export bills had been realized or regularized, while only three bills remained unrealized. Mere pendency of requests before the Reserve Bank for write-off or extension did not amount to grant of such relief, but the later realization of some bills did dilute the adverse presumption to an extent. The appellant, however, could not displace the presumption entirely in relation to the three outstanding bills.

Conclusion: The contravention was sustained only in respect of the three unrealized bills, and the penalty was reduced.

Final Conclusion: The liability was confined to part of the disputed export proceeds, resulting in partial relief by reduction of penalty while maintaining the finding of contravention to that limited extent.

Ratio Decidendi: Where export proceeds remain unrealized beyond the prescribed period, the presumption of failure to take reasonable steps under the foreign exchange law is rebuttable, but mere pendency of a write-off or extension request does not by itself rebut that presumption.

---