TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (12) TMI 553
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Rajesh Mishra and Rs. 1 lakh each on its female partners namely Smt. Kanchan Mishra, Ritu Mishra and Jaya Mishra for the reason of acknowledging debt, creating right in favour of foreign party M/s. EURO, West Germany in contravention of section 9(1)(c) of FER Act, 1973. 1 to 3. This appeal is filed in the name of partnership firm M/s. Shyam Exports and its 5 partners namely Manish Mishra, Rajesh Mishra, Smt. Kanchan Mishra, Smt. Ritu Mishra and Smt. Jaya Mishra but court fees paid only for a single appeal. When this defect is pointed out to the Counsel appearing for the appellants, he made an oral prayer that these appeals may be treated as having been filed by partnership firm alone and any other names, i.e., of partners can be disreg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he erstwhile FER Board which is substituted by this Tribunal on being repealed by the said Act by FEMA, 1999. Similarly, FEMA, 1999 contains substitutive and procedural 1999. Similarly, FEMA, 1999 contains substitutive and procedural provisions providing therein that adjudication proceedings can be held after a complaint is filed under section 16 before the adjudicating authority which was totally absent in FER Act, 1973. Under the provisions of FER Act, 1973 adjudicating officer can take notice of contravention by issuing a show-cause notice whereafter the noticee is required to file a reply and proceedings can be held if the adjudicating officer is not satisfied with the reply, if any, to the show-cause notice. The argument of the Ld. Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons in the repealing Act, i.e., FEMA, 1999 as remedy under repealed Act alone is available as specified under section 6(e) of General Clauses Act. Moreover, the appeals before this Tribunal as a substituted forum of erstwhile FER Board in continuation of adjudication proceedings under FER Act, 1973 will have to be governed by the provisions of FER Act, 1973. Therefore, this appeal has to be decided under the law proper which is none else but FER Act, 1973. Therefore, the argument that this appeal is filed under section 19(2) of FEMA, 1999 is fallacious and does not contain any merit. 7. It is well settled in law that whenever a law is altered during the pendency of any action, the remedy or the rights of the parties are required to be de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which are thus re-enacted continue in force uninterruptedly unless, the re-enacted enactment manifests an intention incompatible with or contrary to the provisions of the repealed Act. Such incompatibility will have to be ascertained from a consideration of the relevant provisions of the re-enacted enactment and the mere absence of saving clause is, by itself, not material for consideration of all the relevant provisions of the new enactment. In other words, a clear legislative intention of the re-enacted enactment has to be inferred and gathered whether it intended to preserve all the rights and liabilities of a repealed statute intact or modify or to obliterate them altogether." (p. 373) 9. Thus, it is well settled that effect of repea....