1986 (9) TMI 163

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the High Court of Delhi dismissing the appellant's appeal made under section 23 EE of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Briefly facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant has been carrying the business of exporting goods to the various part of the world. During the year 1966 it effected shipment of brassware goods to a foreign buyer in the United States valued at US $ 5976, out of which the appellant repatriated US $ 2931.42 leaving a balance of US $ 3044.58. Since the appellant failed to repatriate the entire value of the exported goods a show cause notice was issued under section 12(2) of the Act initiating adjudication proceedings contemplated by section 23D of the Act against th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the High Court against the appellate order. The High Court dismissed the appeal on the findings that the order of the Appellate Authority did not suffer from any error of law. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant urged that there was no contravention of sub-section (2) of section 12 of the Act and the High Court as well as the authorities constituted under the Act committed error in holding the appellant guilty. We find no merit in the submission. Section 12(2) is as under : 12(2) Where any export of goods has been made to which a notification under sub-section (1) applies, no person entitled to sell, or procure the sale of, the said goods shall, except with the permission of the Reserve Bank, (do or refrain from doing anything o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(b) of the Act. The appellant exported goods to foreign buyer in the United States but he failed to repatriate the full amount payable by the foreign buyer. The findings recorded by the Deputy Director Enforcement and the Appellate Authority leave no room for doubt that the appellant took delivery of goods himself when he was in U.S.A. and sold the same by private sale in a surreptitious manner disregarding the directions of the Reserve bank of India and keeping it in dark about it. The appellant has not proved how much value and foreign exchange he realized by such private sale. In the first place he could not have sold the goods privately in a secretive manner contrary to the directions of the Reserve Bank of India. In the next place he s....