MONOTOSH SAHA Vs. SPECIAL DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant under Section 35 of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (in short the Act).

(3.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows : Memorandum was issued by the Enforcement Directorate, Ministry of Finance. On the basis of certain statements recorded it was indicated therein that M/s. God sons (India) and its proprietor, the present appellant had acquired foreign exchange contravening the provisions of Section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (in short the Foreign Exchange Act) thereby rendering him liable to be proceeded under Section 50 of the Foreign Exchange Act. The memorandum was issued under Rule 3 of the Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal Rules, 1974 (in short Adjudication Rules). The reply to the show cause notice was filed by the appellant. The Special Director of Foreign Exchange Act passed an order on 13th May, 2005 imposing penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs on the appellant. The appellant pre ferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal (Foreign Exchange) (in short the Tribunal) and filed an application for dispensing with the requirement of pre-de posit. By order dated 7.3.2006 the Tribunal passed an order directing deposit of 60% of the penalty amount for the purpose of entertaining the appeal. An appeal was filed under Section 35 of the Act which came to be dismissed by the High Court holding that no case for hardship was made out either before the Tribunal or before it and, therefore, there was no scope of interference with the order of the Tribunal. How ever, time permitting the deposit was extended.