SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA & V. GOPALA GOWDA, JJ.
Opera House Exports Limited – Appellant
Vs.
Union of India – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1451-1455 of 2014 and Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 4742-4746 of 2011
Decided On : 14.7.2014
FERA - Section 40 - Service of adjudication order – Condonation of delay - Whether appeals before Tribunal against order of adjudicating authority had to be treated by Tribunal under provisions of FERA or FEMA - Whether Tribunal has power to condone delay beyond period of 90 days - It was found that there was a prima facie case of violation of Section 18(2) & 18(3) of FERA by Company, Respondent initiated inquiries against Company with regard to export bills pending realization, reasons for pendency and steps taken for realizing said bills - During course of investigation, a directive Under Section 33(2) of FERA was issued to Company in response to which Company requested for time till for furnishing requisite details - It was alleged that since no reply was furnished by Company even by said date summons was issued to Directors of Company which also evoked no response from the Company - Held, It is pleaded on behalf of Appellant and was not disputed by Respondents that said adjudication order was served on Appellant - Delay in filing appeal can be computed - Therefore, we hold that even Under Section 52 of FERA Appellate Board was empowered to condone delay, as the appeal was filed before 90 days and not later than 90 days - Set aside impugned judgment passed by High Court and order passed by Tribunal - Appeals are allowed.
JUDGMENT :
S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 9th February, 2011 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 342 of 2009 etc. By the impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeals preferred by the Appellants herein and upheld the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange (hereinafter referred to as the, Tribunal) on the ground that the appeals were filed beyond the period of 90 days from the date of service of adjudication order.
3. The factual matrix of the case is as follows:-
The State Bank of India, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi by its XOS statement dated 21.01.1995 disclosed that the Appellant M/s. Opera House Exports Ltd. D-12/2, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the, Company) did not realize substantial amount of its export bills and that the bills pending realization were for the period 1991 to 1994. Since it was found that there was a prima facie case of violation of Section 18(2) & 18(3) of the FERA by the Company, the Respondent initiated inquiries against the Company with regard to the export bills pending realization, reasons for pendency and steps taken for realizing the said bills. During the course of investigation, a directive Under Section 33(2) of FERA was issued to the Company on 23.2.1996 in response to which the Company requested for time till 14.4.1996 for furnishing the requisite details. It was alleged that since no reply was furnished by the Company even by the said date summons was issued to the Directors of the Company on 16.5.1996, which also evoked no response from the Company. Summons was, therefore, issued to the Managing Director of the Company for his appearance on 10.9.1996. Since there was no compliance of the same, another summons was issued for his appearance on 30.9.1996. In response to the said summons, Mr. Sushil Kumar, Managing Director of the Company vide letter dated 28.9.1996, authorized Mrs. Rakesh Verma, General Manager (Finance) and Mr. Y.K. Jha, Manager (Export) to represent him in the matter. On 30.9.1996 Smt. Rakesh Verma, General Manager (Finance) attended the Directorate's Office and her statement was recorded Under Section 40 of the FERA. She explained the matter and also furnished copy of a letter dated 30.4.1996 from the State Bank of India (For short, SBI), confirming realization of an amount of Rs. 9,72,203/- pertaining to the exports made during the period 1992-1995.
Thereafter, summons was issued to Mr. Sushil Kumar again Under Section 40 of the FERA for appearance on 19.8.1999. The Company vide letter dated 19.8.1999 informed that Mr. Sushil Kumar had resigned from the post of Managing Director and Mr. Jitinder Kumar Sharma had taken over as Managing Director. The Appellant vide letter dated 27.3.2000 again requested RBI to write off and to issue necessary instruction to SBI. Thereafter summons were again issued Under Section 40 of the FERA on 17.7.2000 to three Directors of the Company asking them to appear on 30.7.2000. Simultaneously, enquiries Under Section 33(2) of FERA were also made with the authorized dealers-SBI, Phase-II, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. The Bank vide letter dated 30.8.2000 submitted details of the export bills pending realization together with copies of relevant GR's. It was alleged that number of opportunities had been provided to the Company and its representatives to appear personally and explain the reasons for the outstanding export bills, steps taken for realization of the pending proceeds etc. But the Company did not avail those opportunities and failed to furnish any information.
The SBI, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi by its XOS statement dated 30.8.2000 revealed that US$ 109353.88, Italian Lira 5952000, DM. 2738842.85, FR.F. 573129, UK Pounds 3302 and CHF. 4354 equivale
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.