TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (5) TMI 399
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioner on account of not taking adequate steps to recover the money from a foreign buyer. The Assistant Director imposed a penalty of Rs.90,000/- which was reduced to Rs.60,000/- by the first Appellate Authority, that is, the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, New Delhi vide its order dated 4th June, 2007. This is the order which is the subject matter of the present appeal. 2. According to the appellant, this appeal raises the following questions of law:- (i) What is the scope and ambit of the phrase 'reasonable steps' as appearing under Section 18(3) of the FERA? (ii) Whether the FERA Appellate Board committed an error in law in holding that steps taken by the appellant were not reasonable considering the fact that the ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... payment and also about the fate of the goods received by the foreign buyer. 4. I have heard the submissions from both the sides. All the grounds taken before me have been dealt with by the Appellate Authority in its order dated 4-6-2007 while deciding Appeal No. 669/1990. It would be appropriate to take note of the following paragraphs of the aforesaid judgment:- 4. As against it, Shri A.C. Singh vehemently argued against the contentions raised by the appellant stating that no documents relating to the liquidation of the foreign buyer company was filed by the appellant despite his assurances given to the Adjudicating Officer which is clear from the perusal of the impugned order. The appellant could not furnish the report of the offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....omes amply clear that the matter has been settled by the parties on their own and the impugned order was liable to be confirmed. 6. I have heard the rival submission of both the parties and gone through the record and the law on the point. The appellant has relied on the letter of JKR Credit Management Bureau dated 18-6-90 which is page 28 of the paper book to prove that the foreign buyer company went into liquidation for which the appellant could not realize the outstanding dues. The letter hardly helps the appellant which does not speak of liquidation of the foreign buyer but mentions of non-traceability of the foreign buyer where last accounts of the foreign company were available for year 1985-86 which did not file accounts for the y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epatriation of export proceeds to rebut this presumption. 8. The appellant did not file the report of liquidation despite directions of RBI nor got its confirmation from the High Commission of London. He failed to approach RBI for advice or extension of time. In view of the aforesaid discussion it becomes amply clear that the appellant failed to take reasonable steps to realize the outstanding export dues rather it settled the matter directly with the overseas buyer without permission of RBI which resulted in the loss of foreign exchange equivalent to Rs.67,200/- to the country. Having considered the facts, evidence and circumstances of the case, I come to the conclusion that the appellant has rightly been held guilty by the Adjudicating....