FINAL ORDER

19.11.2025

This Order disposes of the Appeal No. FPA-FE-52/MUM/2019 filed by Shri Ishwar Gidwani, against the Order No. ADJ/01/DD/SB/B/ 2010/2200 dated 15.03.2010 (Impugned Order) passed by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India, Mumbai. Penalty of Rs. 30,00,000/- was imposed on the Appellant Shri Ishwar Gidwani for the contravention of Section 8 (1) and Section 8 (2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1976 (FERA) vide the Impugned Order. Further penalties of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the contravention of Section 9 (1) (f) (i) and of Rs. 5,000/- for the contravention of Section 14 of FERA were imposed vide the Impugned Order.

2. The Show Cause Notice (SCN) No. T-4/70-B/94 (SCH) was issued to the Appellant Shri Ishwar Gidwani on 29.09.1994, besides making Smt. Gopi T Hirdaramani, Shri Jayanti Lal B Shah and Shri Jayesh C Shah as Co-Noticees. A list of 23 documents was annexed to the SCN, as relied upon documents (RUDs). An Order-In-Original dated 26.08.2003 was passed by then Deputy Director, ED, Mumbai. Besides imposing penalty on other Co-Noticees (exception being Shri Jayesh C Shah, who had expired), penalty was imposed on the Appellant Shri Ishwar Gidwani. The Appeal filed by the Appellant against the Order dated 26.08.2003 was disposed of by this Tribunal on 18.12.2007. The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in its Order dated 10.09.2009 in FERA Appeal No. 55 of 2009 set aside the Order-In-Original dated 26.08.2003 along with the Order dated 18.12.2007 of this Tribunal, remanding the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority. This resulted in the Impugned Order being issued on 15.03.2010. Initially the Impugned Order was challenged before the Special Director (Appeals) FEMA, Mumbai, however, the Appeal was dismissed on 15.05.2019, as not maintainable with observations that the Appeal need to be filed before this Tribunal under Section 19 of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA). The present Appeal was filed on 05.09.2019. This Tribunal vide Order dated 14.03.2024 completely waived off the pre-deposit of penalty on the grounds that the Appellant had already deposited sum of Rs. 5,10,000/- vide draft dated 07.11.2005, while filing the Appeal against the Order dated 26.08.2003 and further Rs. 3,90,000/- having been seized from the Appellant was in custody of the Respondent Directorate.

3. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant stated that the Adjudicating Authority erred in law in imposing a penalty of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakhs only) u/s 8 (1) and 8 (2) for having otherwise acquired at illegal rates and/or transferring outside India foreign exchange equivalent to Rs. 40,36,842/- and of US $ 56,970, Fr. Fr. 26,120 and Stg £ 2850, Sing. $ 1,90,509.33; Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) u/s 9 (1) (f) (i) for receiving Rs. 1,60,075/- in India, in lieu of Sing. $ 7500 paid to Shri Khetsi Hirji Shah outside India, and Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) u/s 14 for not surrendering Sing. $ 200 held by him outside India. Ld. Counsel argued that US $ 17000 seized from the Co- Noticee Smt. Gopi T Hirdaramani at Mumbai Airport cannot be accepted to have been given to her by the Appellant merely because she had not declared it at the Airport. He argued that none of the statement can be relied upon as these were subsequently retracted.

4. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant further contended that the follow up search conducted at the residential premises of the Appellant resulted in recovery of certain documents which were clearly written without any code, and could not have been also relied upon since it was a xerox copy, not written in his hand and without mention of any foreign currency. Ld. Counsel contended that the confessional statement of Smt. Gopi T Hirdaramani could not have also been relied upon. Ld. Counsel further contended that the alleged previous transactions between the Appellant and Smt. Gopi T Hirdaramani also could not have been relied upon as the same have not been corroborated