Section 37A could be invoked on a continuing contravention that...

Section 37A could be invoked on a continuing contravention that extended beyond its insertion, and the appeal was maintainable by the Union of India as an aggrieved person through an authorised officer. The Tribunal held that false answers in ODI filings could not be excused by later form changes, and that protective seizure under Section 37A was wrongly set aside on that basis. It also found the Competent Authority's acceptance of step-down subsidiary reporting compliance and bona fide use of ODI funds to be perverse for want of supporting material. Alleged denial of natural justice was rejected because the respondent had received summons, filed replies, and obtained further time. The impugned order was set aside and the seizure restored.