This case pertains to an alleged offense under FEMA involving...

This case pertains to an alleged offense under FEMA involving bogus purported exports with inflated invoices to obtain export benefits, where the goods never reached the destination. The key points are: the Adjudicating Authority relied on statements recorded during investigation u/s 37 of FEMA, along with corroborating documentary evidence. The appellant sought cross-examination of witnesses, which was denied as the case was primarily based on documentary evidence. The Tribunal held that cross-examination is material only when the case relies solely on oral statements without documentary evidence. Tribunals are not bound by Civil Procedure Code and can adopt summary procedures. The appellant's request for cross-examination was seen as an attempt to delay proceedings without disclosing his defense. The appeal was dismissed, directing the Adjudicating Authority to conclude proceedings based on evidence, while allowing the appellant to file a reply and the Authority to examine witnesses if required in the interest of justice.