Partly allowed

FPA-FE-24/DLI/2015 of Sh. Gopalkrishan v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP23 Feb 2018FPA-FE-24/DLI/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal on the Foreign Exchange Management Act disposed of five appeals regarding imposed penalties. It ordered the company appellant to deposit Rs. 5 lakhs, noting an unexplained delay and that three directors were appointed after the transaction year.

What did the court decide?

Appellant company directed to deposit Rs. 5 lakhs; applications for waiver of pre-deposit disposed of.

FPA-FE-24/DLI/2015 of Sh. Gopalkrishan v/s The Joint… — Service and Employment | ATFP (2018)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT ACT

¶2

AT NEW DELHI

¶3

FPA-FE-21/DLI/2015
M/s. Akzo Nobel India Ltd. …	Appellant
FPA-FE-22/DLI/2015
Sh Nihal Kaviratne …	Appellant
FPA-FE-23/DLI/2015
Sh. Amit Jain …	Appellant
FPA-FE-24/DLI/2015
Sh. Gopalkrishan …	Appellant
FPA-FE-25/DLI/2015
Sh. Sanjay Mishra. … App	ellant
Versus
The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi …	Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶4

For the appellant : Shri R. Rajagopalan Advocate For the respondent : Shri Pankaj Yadav, Legal Consultant CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN

¶5

ORDER

¶6

23.02.2018

¶7

FPA-FE-21,22,23,24 & 25/DLI/2015

¶8

The following penalty was imposed on company and which directors:-

¶9

(i) M/s AKZO Nobel India Ltd. : 2,50,000/-(Rs. One Lakh Only) (ii) Sh. Nihal Kaviratne :1,00,000/-(Rs. One Lakh Only) (iii) Sh. Amit Jain :1,00,000/-(Rs. One Lakh Only) (iv) Sh. Sh. R. Gopalkrishnan :1,00,000/-(Rs. One Lakh Only) (v) Sh. Sanjeev Mishra :1,00,000/-(Rs. One Lakh Only)

¶10

As far as Mr. Amit Jain, Nihal Kaviratne & Sh. Saneev Mishra

¶11

they have director in the year 2009-10. The remittance admittedly of

¶12

year 2001. The Investigation was completed in the year 2012. Show

¶13

FPA-FE-21,22,23,24&25/DLI/2015

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

cause was notice issued in 31^st March, 2014. Prima facie there is an unexplained delay.

¶16

In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances, let the appellant company shall deposit to penalty sum of Rs. 5 lakhs with the respondent. Counsel for the appellant is agreeable to deposit the said amount without prejudice. Out of 4 directors 3 of them appointed in the year 2009-10. The transaction in questions are for the year 2001-2002. The application for waiver of pre-deposit application is accordingly disposed of

¶17

List this appeal on 1^st August, 2018

¶18

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶19

New Delhi, 23^rd February, 2018.

¶20

‘s’

¶21

FPA-FE-21,22,23,24&25/DLI/2015

¶22

Page 2 of 2

FPA-FE-24/DLI/2015 of Sh. Gopalkrishan v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-FE-24/DLI/2015 of Sh. Gopalkrishan v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases