2024 (9) TMI 939

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assed by the Adjudicating Authority. Brief facts of the case. 2. The appellant was served with a Show Cause Notice by the Memorandum dated 29.05.2002 alleging that he, apart from others were involved in receiving payments in foreign exchange during 1996-97 through fake export documents and, in fact, without any export of goods to overseas parties. The appellant belonging to M/s Maple Systems, Baroda and two other firms were having the same allegation. It was alleged that the three firms including M/s Maple Systems had paid equivalent amount to persons in India locally in consideration of arranging remittances of US$ 11,22,388/- in the guise of fake export proceeds. 3. The allegations against the appellant are for contravention of Section ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the appellant against the total penalty of Rs.5 lakhs. Thus, the penalty amount be restricted to the amount already deposited. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent contested the appeal. It was submitted that Paresh Dave may be the kingpin of the contravention along with his entities. However, the appellant was also found involved being the signatory of M/s Mapel Systems. In fact, he was the Sole Proprietor of the aforesaid firm. It could be that the transactions were largely made at the instance of Paresh Dave and his four entities apart from Parshuram Dave on whom the separate penalty has been imposed. In the light of the aforesaid and as the contravention of the appellant was established on the face of the record, there would be n....