TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the retracted confessional statements of the appellant could be relied upon despite allegations of duress and denial of cross-examination; (ii) whether Indian currency recovered from the appellant's premises could lawfully be confiscated under the foreign exchange law; and (iii) whether the appellant's conduct amounted to an "attempt" to contravene the foreign exchange law.
Issue (i): whether the retracted confessional statements of the appellant could be relied upon despite allegations of duress and denial of cross-examination.
Analysis: A retracted statement is not automatically rejected merely because it has been withdrawn. The relevant test is whether the statement was voluntary and whether it finds corroboration in surrounding facts and materials. The material on record included recoveries of foreign exchange, gold and documents from the appellant's premises, along with statements of other persons and the explanation offered by the adjudicating authority for declining further cross-examination after repeated adjournments. The challenge to voluntariness depended on appreciation of evidence and the appellant failed to show perversity in the concurrent findings.
Conclusion: The retracted statements were not vitiated for want of voluntariness or corroboration, and reliance on them was upheld against the appellant.
Issue (ii): whether Indian currency recovered from the appellant's premises could lawfully be confiscated under the foreign exchange law.
Analysis: The confiscation power under the governing provision extends to any currency or money in respect of which contravention has taken place. The provision is wide in language and is capable of including Indian currency where it is connected with the contravention. On the facts, the authorities found that the appellant could not explain the source of the cash and that the seizure formed part of the illegal foreign exchange transaction. That finding was factual, not a pure question of statutory interpretation, and no perversity was shown.
Conclusion: Confiscation of the Indian currency was legally permissible and the appellant's challenge failed.
Issue (iii): whether the appellant's conduct amounted to an "attempt" to contravene the foreign exchange law.
Analysis: An attempt begins after preparation is complete and the person embarks on conduct that is a direct movement towards commission of the prohibited act. The Court applied this distinction to the surrounding circumstances, including the recoveries, the appellant's statements, the documents seized and the absence of a lawful explanation for the cash. The question was treated as at least a mixed question of law and fact, and the factual inference drawn by the authorities was not shown to be irrational or perverse.
Conclusion: The appellant's conduct constituted an attempt within the meaning of the provision, and the finding against the appellant was sustained.
Final Conclusion: The concurrent findings of the adjudicating authority and the tribunal were upheld, and no question of law warranting interference was made out.
Ratio Decidendi: In an appeal confined to questions of law, concurrent findings based on corroborated retracted statements, statutory confiscation powers, and factual inference on attempt will not be interfered with unless they are shown to be perverse or unsupported by evidence.
TaxTMI 
