SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(SC) 952

B.SUDERSHAN REDDY, S.S.NIJJAR
Kanwar Natwar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Director of Enforcement – Respondent


JUDGMENT

B. Sudershan Reddy, J. —

1. The central question of law arising on the appeal before this Court is whether a noticee served with show cause notice under Rule 4(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management (Adjudication Proceedings and Appeal) Rules, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’) is entitled to demand to furnish all the documents in possession of the Adjudicating Authority including those documents upon which no reliance has been placed to issue a notice requiring him to show cause why an inquiry should not be held against him?

The Adjudicating Authority’s refusal to supply all the documents as demanded by the appellants led to filing of writ petitions by the appellants in Delhi High Court which were heard and dismissed.

2. In order to consider and decide the issue that arises for our consideration, it is just and necessary to briefly notice the relevant facts:

PART I : BACKGROUND FACTS

A complaint in writing has been filed by an officer authorized against the appellants under sub-section (3) of Section 16 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘FEMA’ or ‘the Act’) in which certain serious allegations have been levelled against the
























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top