Retraction of statement does not defeat corroborated foreign exchange contravention findings and confiscation

Retractions of statements did not displace confiscation and penalty findings where contemporaneous oral and documentary material, including seized currency, search records and writings, corroborated foreign exchange dealings. The tribunal treated the recovered documents as business records evidencing attempts to buy and sell foreign currency, and rejected the claim that the seized Indian currency represented accounted business receipts as an afterthought. On that evidentiary basis, contraventions of foreign exchange law were established and the confiscation and penalty order was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty and confiscation orders passed for contravention of foreign exchange law were liable to be set aside on the ground that the appellants relied on retraction of statements and asserted that the seized currency belonged to legitimate business receipts.

Analysis: The material on record showed that currency and documents were recovered during the search, and the statements recorded at the spot from the appellants and other persons described foreign exchange dealings and attempts to purchase and sell foreign currency. The seized writings were treated as contemporaneous business records of foreign exchange transactions. The challenge that the statement of one of the persons was unsigned or later retracted did not displace the other oral and documentary evidence, because the record was found to corroborate the search seizure, the recovered documents, and the admissions regarding currency exchange activity. The explanation that the seized Indian currency represented accounted business receipts was rejected as an afterthought in the face of the contemporaneous material.

Conclusion: The confiscation and penalties were upheld, and the challenge to the impugned adjudication order failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeals were dismissed because the evidence established contraventions of the foreign exchange law and the confiscation and penalty order was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A retracted statement does not lose evidentiary value where it is supported by contemporaneous oral and documentary material, and such corroborated evidence can sustain findings of foreign exchange contravention and confiscation.

---