TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 923
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....andum No. T-4/24-C/95(SCN-I) dated 15.09.1995. 2. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant Shri Nitya Majumdar is the son of Late Shri Anil Majumdar residing at HA-267, Salt Lake, Kolkata is a citizen of India. The Appellant came to India in the year 1965 from Bangladesh. In 1971, when Bangladesh became independent, the Appellant went back to Bangladesh but with the deteriorated situation in Bangladesh, the Appellant came back to India in 1982 and was staying in a rented premises. Thereafter, he started transport business and out of the profit of such transport business, the Appellant had purchased a land in Jangra in his name. Thereafter in 1992, he started living after completion of the premises in Plot No. HA 224. The Appellant planned to start a business under the name and style of "Majumdar Traders at Burrabazar, 52/A, Eastern Road, Kolkata". But commencement of business from the said premises did not materialize and the business was running from the house of the Appellant at Salt Lake. The Appellant was having two employees. One of the employees was Shri Deepak Debnath. Only on the basis of apprehension, Shri Debnath was also arrested and some documents w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt SCN had been issued. 3. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant contended that this is a very old case vide Memorandum No. T-4/24-C/95(SCN-I) dated 15.09.1995, based on search and seizure made on 04.10.1994 as is appearing from the Memorandum. From the records so far available with the Appellant, it appears that Personal Hearing Notice was given on 08.09.2004, fixing the date of Personal Hearing on 29.09.2004. The Appellant vide his letter dated 22.09.2004, contended that copies of none of the documents relied on were supplied to him and in the absence of those documents, the Appellant could not submit the reply to the Show Cause Memo. The Appellant stated that though adjournment was prayed for, the Appellant's Advocate appeared before the Authority on 29.09.2004 and requested for supply of relied upon documents as mentioned in (c) of Annexure "A" and also indicated the preliminary objection about the maintainability of the proceeding. 4. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant further contended that the Appellant did not receive any response from the Department for a long time. After about twenty years from the date of SCN dated 15.09.1995, the Appellant was intimated vide letter dated 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ness link with M/s. Tea Pack Speciality and also explained the seized documents. Shri Anup Agarwal in his statements dated 05.10.1994, 10.10.1994, 17.01.1995 and 01.02.1995 stating his antecedents, activities and business link with the said Shri Bijay Kr. Agarwal, his elder brother and M/s. Tea Packs Speciality. 7. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent further submitted that Shri Uma Shankar Karel, S/o Begrajji Karel of 13, Hanspukuria 1 Lane, 1 floor, Kolkata 700 007 in his statement dated 31.10.94 stated the facts and modus operandi regarding unauthorized transfer of funds from India to abroad, quantum, etc. made by Shri Bijay Kr. Agarwal in association with Shri Karel and others under secret arrangements with persons resident outside India. Shri Lalit Dhanuka of 26, P.K. Tagore Street, Kolkata, one of the partners of M/s. Tea Packs Speciality in his statement dated 10.11.1994 in presence of his Advocate stated the activities of M/s. Tea Pack Speciality, S/Shri Bijay Kr. Agarwal, Anup Kumar Agarwal and the modus operandi of their unauthorized transfer of funds from India to abroad etc. which clearly corroborated the statement made by the said Shri Uma Shankar Karel. M/s. Tea Packs Sp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aj towards the difference of over-invoiced amounts of tea exported by M/s. TPS to transfer to Singapore and that the aid Shri Karel had paid the said amount to Shri Nitya Mazumdar who in turn had got converted the Indian currency into equivalent amount of Bangladesh currency and transferred the funds to Singapore en- route Bangladesh, by order or on behalf of the aid Shri Narayan Saha of Singapore, a person resident outside India other than an authorized dealer and under arrangements made with the said Shri Debashis Mazumdar of Dhaka, Bangladesh, a person resident outside India which have also been clearly admitted by Shri Karel in his statements dated 30.05.1994 and 31.10.1994 duly corroborated by the statement dated 10.11.1994 made by Shri Lalit Dhanuka, partner of M/s. TPS, without any general or special exemption from the Reserve Bank of India. 10. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent stated that it is clear from the Impugned Order that despite a number of opportunities the Appellant failed to participate in the Adjudication proceedings, as well as failed to file reply to the SCN. Ld. Counsel read the para in the Impugned Order relating to the same: "The Noticees requeste....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reign exchange to Singapore en-route Bangladesh, without any prior general or special permission of the RBI, had contravened the provisions of Sections 8(1), 8(2) and 9(1)(b) of the Act, therefore, the charge framed against him is established and I find him guilty of the charge." He therefore pleaded to dismiss the Appeal. 12. We have considered the rival submissions and the material on record. We find that part of the delay in adjudicating the matter is attributable to the Appellant and other Noticees, who are co- accused in the said matter. We also note that in the Tribunal Order dated 18.02.2019, it is the pre-deposit of the penalty amount, which has been dispensed with on the grounds of the delay in adjudication. However, the said Order has not allowed the Appeal at that stage and dropped the proceedings. 13. We also find from the record that the document comprising of Telephone Index Book marked A and bunch of Paper marked B were seized from the office of M/s. Tea Packs Speciality Ltd. The statements made by S/Shri Bijay Kumar Agarwal, Lalit Dhanuka and Uma Shankar Karel explained the modus operandi bringing out the role of the Appellant, and the enquiries made with t....