https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457876 An ex parte adjudication order made before the scheduled hearing date was unsustainable because the party had not been given the fixed opportunity to present its defence, and the order was set aside for fresh adjudication after adequate hearing. Section 68(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 could not be invoked against a proprietary concern as though it were a separate legal person, because a proprietary business has no legal existence independent of its proprietor. The appeal succeeded and the matter was remanded for reconsideration in accordance with procedural fairness and the correct legal status of a proprietary concern. en-us Wed, 16 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:33:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457876 An ex parte adjudication order made before the scheduled hearing date was unsustainable because the party had not been given the fixed opportunity to present its defence, and the order was set aside for fresh adjudication after adequate hearing. Section 68(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 could not be invoked against a proprietary concern as though it were a separate legal person, because a proprietary business has no legal existence independent of its proprietor. The appeal succeeded and the matter was remanded for reconsideration in accordance with procedural fairness and the correct legal status of a proprietary concern. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 16 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457876