TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (8) TMI 1457
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e conclusions made by the learned adjudicating officer were wrong. The adjudicating officer erred in accepting the opinion of a private handwriting expert. Instead, Shri Gadoo submitted, he should have referred the matter to a Government examiner for his opinion. Shri Gadoo further submitted that for two out-patients, no doctor would receive foreign exchange equivalent to Rs. 6,85,020 towards fee. It is thus clear that the Respondent No. 1 purchased the foreign exchange illegally from the foreign tourist who came to his clinic for treatment. Shri Gadoo further submitted that statement of Respondent No. 1 was in his own handwriting and was made voluntarily and was sufficient to hold the respondent guilty of the alleged contravention. 3. Shr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation. The respondent furnished requisite bills, giving the detailed break-up of total expenses of six patients. The petitioner should have crossed checked the same before initiating adjudication proceedings. Shri Chandra further, submitted that it is wrong to said that private handwriting expert opinion was taken. He submitted that the respondent merely made a request to the petitioner Department for obtaining handwriting expert opinion pursuant to which the petitioner Department made a reference to a Government agency of the State of Maharashtra. Shri Sarvesh Chandra also submitted that the present petition is under Foreign Exchange Management Act and not under 1973 Act. There is no saving clause under the present Act with regard to revis....