1986 (9) TMI 356

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant's appeal made under section 23EE of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Briefly, the facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant has been carrying on the business of exporting goods to various parts of the world. During the year 1966, it effected shipment of brassware goods to a foreign buyer in the United States valued at U.S. $ 5,976, out of which the appellant repatriated U.S. $ 2,931.42 leaving a balance of U.S. S 3,044.58. 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 the appellant and its p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 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. 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 or take or refrain from taking an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt exported goods to the 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 of Enforcement and the Appellate Authority leave no room for doubt that the appellant took delivery of goods himself when he was in the 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 the dark about it. The appellant has not proved how much value and foreign exchange he realised 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 should hav....