TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 380
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hree appeals preferred by Shri Ravi Goenka, Shri Vasudev Goenka and also the Union of India through DLA(HO), ED New Delhi. 2. Shri Ravi Goenka and Shri Vasudev Goenka were served with show cause notice by the Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement alleging contravention of Section 3(c) and 3(d) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (in short "the Act of 1999"). After submission of reply and at length arguments, the Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement imposed penalty of Rs. 25,00,000/- on Shri Vasudev Goenka for contravention of Section 3(d) of the Act of 1999 and equivalent penalty on Shri Ravi Goenka for the contravention of Section 3(d) of the Act of 1999. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Special Director, Dire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsidered on merit. The elaborate argument to challenge the penalty of Rs. 25,00,000/- on each of the appellant was made. 5. The arguments raised by the appellant, Shri Vasudev Goenka and Ravi Goenka would be referred after dealing with the case of the Union of India to challenge the same order for denying the confiscation of seized amount of Rs. 89,70,000/-. It is for the reason that if no case is made out in the appeal preferred by the appellant, Union of India, then as per the statement of the Ld. Counsel for the appellants, their appeals would not require to be taken up on merit, rather, it would be disposed of with the direction to adjust the amount of penalty in the amount of Rs. 89,70,000/- withheld by the respondent, as stated by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case was not made out for the reason that the amount of Rs. 89,70,000/- was not involved in the financial transaction in absence of its transfer and otherwise preparation to transfer the amount cannot be said to be contravention because attempt to contravene provision was available in the FERA regime but is not provided under the Act of 1999. The facts on record show that at the time of search of the premises of Shri Vasudev Goenka two bags were found containing Indian currency therein. It was meant for delivery to Shri Shaikh Sajid Ibrahim and Shri Vachnaram R. Patel who came to collect the money on the instruction of Anil from Dubai conveyed by Shri Vinurakesh. However, transfer of the money could not take place and for that reference of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regime of FERA, 1973 even attempt was contravention of the provision which does not exist in the present regime. The fact on records shows that no doubt there was attempt to transfer the money aforesaid but before it could take place, the amount was seized by the Enforcement Directorate and thereby it could not be transmitted to Shri Shaikh Sajid Ibrahim or anyone to make a case for contravention of Section 3(d) of the Act of 1999 for the aforesaid amount. The appeal filed by the department is quite sketchy and does not make out a case to cause interference and otherwise we do not find any error in the impugned order and accordingly appeal filed by the Department is dismissed. 12. We find an element of admission of the respondent that t....