https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73713 Failure to inform the detenu that a representation could also be made to the detaining authority vitiated the preventive detention order. The detenu was told only that representations could be submitted to the State Government and the Central Government, but omission of the detaining authority from the advisory communication was treated as a fatal defect. The HC followed the consistent view of prior Division Benches and declined to refer the matter to a larger Bench. The detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 was therefore held invalid and liable to be quashed. en-us Wed, 15 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73713 Failure to inform the detenu that a representation could also be made to the detaining authority vitiated the preventive detention order. The detenu was told only that representations could be submitted to the State Government and the Central Government, but omission of the detaining authority from the advisory communication was treated as a fatal defect. The HC followed the consistent view of prior Division Benches and declined to refer the matter to a larger Bench. The detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 was therefore held invalid and liable to be quashed. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 15 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73713