Non-realisation of export proceeds requires reliable GR-form evidence to rebut customs and banking records

A party disputing liability for non-realisation of export proceeds must adduce reliable record evidence showing that the relevant GR forms were never acted upon or were withdrawn from customs control; unsupported assertions will not displace customs and banking records. The tribunal found that the GR forms were issued in the names of the two firms and treated as genuine by customs, while the appellant's certificate was inconsistent with the official record and the export documentation identified a different clearing agent. No material showed withdrawal of unused GR forms, and the appellant also failed to prove reasonable recovery efforts for the admitted exports. Contravention of Section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 was therefore not disproved, and the penalty was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant established that the alleged non-realisation of export proceeds did not amount to contravention of Section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 on the footing that exports were made only against fewer GR forms and the remaining GR forms were not acted upon.

Analysis: The record showed that 10 GR forms each had been issued in the names of the two firms, and the customs authorities had treated those GR forms as genuine. The certificate relied upon by the appellant was not supported by the official GR record, and the clearing agent identified in the export documentation was different from the person or entity cited by the appellant. No material was produced to show withdrawal of the unused GR forms from the customs or bonded area, and the appellant was unable to prove that the exports were limited to the reduced number of GR forms claimed. The evidence also supported the finding of non-realisation of export proceeds for the exports admitted by the appellant, with no adequate proof of reasonable recovery efforts.

Conclusion: The appellant failed to disprove contravention under Section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, and the penalty was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A party disputing liability for non-realisation of export proceeds must produce reliable record evidence to show that the relevant GR forms were never acted upon or were withdrawn, and mere unsupported assertions cannot displace the presumption arising from the customs and banking records.

---