2001 (6) TMI 840

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. Shri Ojha submitted that all the ingredients required to be satisfied for grant of dispensation of pre-deposit of penalty are satisfied in this case, namely, financial hardship, prima facie case and balance of convenience. Shri Ojha referred to the Income-tax return for the year 1999-2000 wherein the gross total income of the appellant is stated to be Rs. 72,176. Shri Ojha further stated that the allegation made against the appellant per say do not make any offence. He further submitted that the appellant's case is covered by an earlier decision of the Foreign Exchange Appellate Board in Appeal No. 191 of 1996. He relied on paras 4 and 5 of the said order wherein the essential constituents of an offence under section 9(1)(a) are elabora....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g to Rs. 3 lakhs were purchased after making payment of Rs. 3,30,000 by Sh. Prakash C. Solanki to Sh. Kishan Murli Aswani of Hongkong, a person resident outside India." The learned adjudicating authority further observed that since Sh. Solanki has not obtained RBI's exemption from following the provisions of section 9(1)(a) and hence, has contravened the provisions of section (9)(1)(a) by making payment of Rs. 3,30,000 to Sh. Aswani, a person resident outside India. It is pertinent to note that Sh. Solanki has retracted his statement subsequently. However, the learned adjudicating authority did not accept the retraction and relied on the retracted statement for the reason that the said statement contained the facts which was only in the exc....