TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (12) TMI 1066
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... twenty thousand only) against the appellant, Premjibhai Tidabhai Parmar for contravention of provisions of section 8(1) read with section 8(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The penalty amount has already been adjusted from the seized amount. The appellant did not appear despite service of notice. Written submission is received from the appellant which is taken on record. Presently, this appeal is taken up for final disposal on merits. 3. I have heard elaborate arguments from Shri Jagat Singh, Advocate for the respondent and gone through the record, relevant law and judicial pronouncements carefully. The show-cause notice was issued against the appellant for having otherwise purchased US $6,000 from a person in India who ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anki v. Union of India [2009] 92 SCL 157 (SC) alleging that the retracted confessional statement was without any independent material to corroborate it which could not be read against the appellant. It is requested that Rs. 20,000 may be refunded to the appellant. The appellant was not given the opportunity to cross-examine the concerned officers which showed non-application of mind on the part of the Adjudicating Officer. The order was not passed by the Adjudicating Officer for about eight months after hearing the arguments. He could not recall the oral arguments advanced by his Advocate which was against the principle laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court. Independent investigations were required to be made by the Enforcement Officers ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t one person approached him at his village Kewada and offered to buy foreign exchange from him since he was in need for money he fixed a deal of US $2,500 for Rs. 44,000 with the said person. Rs. 44,000 were seized from his house which he admitted was the same amount which was received against US $2,500. 8. The statement of Hasmukhbhai alias Chitubhai Sarang was recorded on 26-12-1988 by customs officers who deposed that he was residing in America for the last nine years who was serving in restaurant named Satar Club. He came to India in October, 1988, who declared nothing before the Custom Authorities. He sold US $2,000 to the appellant when he was in need of money through one Mahendra Shah who was driving the motor cycle. 9. Here it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ansfer or lend to or exchange with, any person not being an authorised dealer, any foreign exchange. Section 8(2) prohibits that no person shall enter into any transaction which provides for conversion of Indian currency into foreign currency or vice versa at rates of exchange other than authorised by RBI. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the confessional statement was retracted by the appellant stating that it was obtained under force and threat and retracted confessional statement was not corroborated by independent evidence and impugned order was liable to be set aside. However, the retraction of the said statements where there is nothing to support the case of the respondent, cannot be of any avail to the appellant. The b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd unless certain reasons and circumstances are brought out or established. No such situation is brought out by the appellants for demanding cross examination. Here it will be relevant to mention the ruling of Supreme Court in Surjit Singh Chhabra v. Union of India [1997] 1 SCC 508 where the Hon'ble Court observed that the customs officials were not police officials and the cross examination of the witnesses was denied on the grounds of the failure of the noticee to give any sufficient reason for the same. The Court observed that the denial of the cross examination under such circumstances was not violation of the principles of natural justice. The principles of natural justice are not rigid and are not violated simply by refusal of cro....