TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (10) TMI 278
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stated that pursuant to the information received from a reliable source, that one Shri Jaikishan Jainani, staying at Flat No. C-1, Vishwgeet Building, Four Bungalows, Andherl (West), Bombay, was indulging in illegal purchase and sale of foreign exchange, the business premises of Shri Jainani were searched on 6-4-1987. The search resulted in the recovery and seizure of the foreign exchange amounting to US $ 500 from his cash box. Statement of Shri Jainani (Appellant) was also recorded on the same day who stated that he purchased US $ 2,300 at the rate of Rs. 14.50 per US Dollar from an unknown person and that he sold US $ 1800 out of the said amount to a person known by the name 'Lucky' for Rs. 26,500. In view thereof, memorandum No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... necessary boots and had brought back the said amount. My stay abroad was arranged by my relatives (as per Passport xerox copy attached). I took out the said 500 US $ and showed it to the Enforcement Officer who seized the same." 3. The Adjudicating Officer did not accept the above explanation and held the appellant guilty of having contravened the provisions of sections 8(1) and 8(2). 4. I have heard the counsel of each of the parties and have perused the record of the case. 5. The counsel for the appellant submitted that the confessional statement was obtained by threat which was later on retracted by the appellant vide his reply to the show-cause notice, that the Assessing Officer was wrong in holding the appellant guilty merely ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oreign exchange exceeding in value Rs. 250, the burden of proving that the foreign exchange came to his possession lawfully shall be on him. It is stated by the appellant that the seized amount of US $ 500 was the FTS amount. A perusal of the photo copy of the passport of the appellant indicates that the FTS amount of US $ 500 was issued to the appellant in TCs on 22-8-1986 whereas the amount recovered and seized from the appellant on 6-4-1987 was in cash. The appellant has not produced certificate indicating conversion of TCs into cash nor has he given any reason as to why he could not produce such a certificate. Further, retraction was too late. It appears to be rather after-thought as it was made in reply to the SCN and there does not ex....