Madras High Court
A.S. Mohamed Ghani vs Special Additional Director, ... on 11 July, 1986
Equivalent citations: 1987(13)ECC316
ORDER S. Nainar Sundaram, J.
1. The order impugned is one passed by the 2nd respondent in respect of an appeal before it preferred by the petitioner herein against the imposition of penalty, under Section 52 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (herein after referred to as "the Act"), and the 2nd respondent has directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 30,000 in each and also to furnish security of either movable or immovable property for a sum of Rs. 45,000. Section 52(2) of the Act contemplates that the penalty imposed should be deposited as a condition precedent for entertaining the appeal. The second proviso to Section 52(2) of the Act reads as follows:
Provided further that where the Appellate Board is of opinion that the deposit to be made will cause undue hardship to the appellant, it may, in its own discretion, dispense with such a deposit either unconditionally or subject to such conditions as it may deem fit.
The impugned order shows that the Appellate Board has taken note of the instructions received from the Finance Department and the pleas put forth by the petitioner and has exercised its discretion while making the above direction. I do not find that the discretion has been improperly exercised so as to warrant an interference by this Court in writ powers.
2. However, Mr. A.J. Abdul Razak, learned Counsel for the petitioner pleads that the sum of Rs. 30,000 directed to be deposited in cash may be permitted to be paid by the petitioner in two equal instalments of Rs. 15,000 each. In my opinion, this will not cause any prejudice to the department or abrogate the order passed by the 2nd respondent. Hence I am inclined to show this indulgence. The petitioner shall deposit this sum of Rs. 30,000 in two equal instalments of Rs. 15,000 each, the first of the instalments to be deposited within a period of eight weeks from today and the next instalment to be deposited within a period of eight weeks thereafter, and the petitioner shall furnish the security of either movable or immovable property for a sum of Rs. 45,000 within the said period of sixteen weeks from today. Except for this modification of the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent herein, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.