LALCHAND Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, New Delhi, in allowing the appeal filed by him only in part, the appellant is before this Court by filing the present appeal.

(2.) SHORN of unnecessary details, the brief facts of the case are that on 10.4.90, one Haza Mohideen was subjected to a search by the Officers of the Enforcement Directorate and from his possession, Indian currency amounting to Rs.4 Lakhs and 2 chits were recovered. A search was conducted in respect of the appellant as well, but the said search did not result in recovery of any incriminating documents. Few other persons were also searched and some documents were seized. Statement was recorded from Haza Mohideen, who deposed that he had indulged in hawala transactions. Similarly, on 10.4.90 and 11.4.90, statement of the appellant was recorded, who stated that he had a friend by name Abdullah, who was working in Dubai for six years and he admitted that he received a phone call from the said Abdullah informing him that one person would come to the house of the appellant and hand over Rs.4 Lakhs and that he should receive the amount and keep it. The appellant was also further informed by the said person that he should contact Haza Mohideen over phone and hand over the said amount for which the appellant would receive a commission of Rs.500/ - for every one lakh. The appellant acknowledged this transaction in his statement and stated that on the said date, viz., 10.4.90, an unknown person came and handed over Rs.4 Lakhs and the appellant, in turn, contacted Haza Mohideen and handed over the amount of Rs.4 Lakhs as agreed.

(3.) IT is the grievance of the appellant that proper opportunity was not given to him to represent his side of the matter at the time of adjudication.