2011 (1) TMI 1235

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ector Enforcement has found the appellant guilty of charge under Section 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) of FERA and imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,00,000/- on the present appellant. 3. The facts in brief is that the information was received by the Mumbai Zonal Office of Enforcement Directorate from the UCO Bank, Nariman Point, Mumbai to the effect that one Shri Ashwin S. Shah, Proprietor of M/s. Shine Star Exports was having an account with the said Bank and the said account was found to be in fictitious. It was alleged that present appellant has deposited an amount of Rs. 35,15,000/- in cash in the said account incidentally of Al Nazir Ghilani who was resident of Dubai and thus he as violated the provisions of FERA. A show cause notice to that eff....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment of appellant by saying that the injuries on the body of appellant may be self infected. This approach of the Adjudicating Authority is not in accordance with the pray laid down by the Apex Court in case of Vinod Solanki (supra). In the aforesaid case the Apex Court has laid down that the burden of proving the fact that the statement recorded in Police custody was voluntary is on the department. In the present case the department has not laid any evidence to show that the statement was not recorded under clause or completion. 5. In the Vinod Solanki's case the Apex Court has laid down that the retracted statement cannot be made the sole basis of imposing penalty under FERA. In such relation this Tribunal will have to find doubt wh....