Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. The short point for consideration before this court is whether on an appeal preferred against an order passed under the repealed provisions of FERA, the court fees would be payable as per provisions of FERA read with 1974 Rules or as per the relevant provisions of FEMA read with Rules 2000.

9. At the outset it would be pertinent to reproduce relevant provisions of FERA, FEMA, 1974 Rules and Rules 2000 which are material to the point in controversy before this court. The relevant provisions of the said enactments reads as under:

19. On a combined reading of the aforesaid sub-Sections and interpretation given to sub-Section 6 to Section 49, the intention of the legislature is made clear. FERA is replaced by FEMA with effect from 1st June, 2000 and the Appellate Board under FERA under Section 52 of FERA is replaced by Appellate Tribunal under Section 18 of FEMA. Rules, notifications, directions, exemptions etc. granted under FERA continue to apply to the extent they are not in conflict with the provisions of FEMA as per Section 49(5) of the FEMA. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act,1897, which protects rights, obligations, actions and liabilities, applies despite repeal of FERA but subject to two year limitation period specified in Sub- section 3 of Section 49 of FEMA for initiation of proceedings. Therefore, by way of express stipulation under Section 49(3) read with Section 49(6) of the FEMA, the effect of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act,1897 is excluded to the extent indicated which is not so for sub-Sections (2), (4) and (5) of the said Section.

20. The scope of Section 49 of the FEMA in light of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act,1897 and the repealed provisions of FERA was discussed by this court in „S.K. Mittal and ors. Vs. Union of India and Anr.‟,161 (2009) DLT 789 wherein it was held:-

"19. In the light of the aforesaid decisions, Section 49 of FEMA and the surrounding factors, it is apparent that Section 49 did not seek to withdraw or take away the vested right to appeal in cases where proceedings were initiated prior to repeal of FERA on 1st June, 2000. FEMA in Section 49(1) and (2) only had the effect of substitution of the Appellate Board under FERA to Appellate Tribunal under FEMA. It did not take away the vested rights to appeal or impose more onerous and stringent conditions for filing of appeals. Imposing stringent or onerous conditions has the effect of taking away vested right for which there must be an express stipulation or implied intendment, which should be apparent and clear from the enactment and the surrounding circumstances leading to the amendment/repeal. It cannot be said that the FEMA in any manner by incorporating Section 49, which specifically makes reference to Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 wanted to do away and take away the vested right to appeal or impose more stringent or harsher conditions on the right to appeal. The said reasoning will equally apply to adjudicating orders, which are passed pursuant to the sunset clause in Sub-section 3 of Section 49. The effect of the sunset clause in Sub-section 3 read with Section 6 to Section 49 is to make the provisions of General Clauses Act applicable to the repealed enactment i.e. FERA. However, in such cases proceedings should have commenced within the limitation period specified in Sub-section 3, i.e., two years and not after two years. All proceedings which are initiated under Sub-section 3 of Section 49 read with Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 the provisions of FERA will continue to apply except with one change that the Appellate Forum, Appellate Board stands substituted with Appellate Tribunal. Change of the Forum does not affect or take away vested right to appeal and does not carries with it stringent or more onerous conditions imposed for filing an Appeal under the FEMA Rules. Reference to Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 in Sub-section 6 of Section 49 of FEMA is against the plea raised by the respondent-Enforcement Directorate that by implied intendment the provisions of FERA and the 1974 Rules framed thereunder, stand substituted by more onerous stipulation of higher Court fees as per the Rules under FEMA.

The cumulative effect of Section 49 of FEMA and Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, in my opinion, are that though FERA stands repealed, yet in respect of the investigations pending before the various authorities, the liability under the FERA, has to be enforced and adjudicated."

(emphasis supplied)

22. There is no inconsistency between 1974 Rules under FERA and the repealed enactment i.e. FEMA or Rules 2000 framed there under on the question of Court fees payable. An appeal against an adjudication order passed under FERA is filed under Section 52 of the FERA and Court Fees is payable on the said appeal as per the 1974 Rules under FERA. Section 52 of FERA applies in relation to appeals against adjudication order under FERA. FEMA in view of Section 49 read with Section 6 of the General Clauses Act,1897 substitutes the Appellate Tribunal instead of the Appellate Board as the forum of appeal under Section 52 of FERA. The appeal in view of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act,1897 and Section 49 of FEMA is filed under Section 52 of FERA but is heard by a different appellate forum i.e. Appellate Tribunal instead of Appellate Board. Appeals against the adjudication orders passed under FERA are not filed under Section 19 of FEMA. Appeals under Section 19 of FEMA are filed against orders under FEMA including first appeals decided by the Special Directors. The Rules 2000 framed under FERA fix and prescribe Court Fees payable on appeals filed under Section 19 of FEMA and not appeals filed before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 52 of FERA read with Section 49 of FEMA. Rule 10 of Rules 2000 under FEMA by express stipulation applies to appeals filed under Section 19 of FEMA. The new Rule does not apply to appeals filed under Section 52 of FERA. The 1974 Rules framed under FERA are applicable to all appeals, even after repeal and enactment of FEMA, when an appeal is filed against an adjudication order passed under FERA. The court fee provisions of Rules 2000 under FEMA do not apply to appeals under Section 52 of the FERA filed against adjudication orders passed under FERA. The court fee provisions of Rules 2000 under FEMA will apply to appeals filed under Section 19 of FEMA and not to appeals filed under Section 52 FERA. There is therefore no inconsistency between Rule 6 of the 1974 Rules under FERA and Rule 10 of the Rules 2000 under FEMA. Both operate independently and separately and to different category or types of appeals. Rule 6 of the 1974 Rules under FERA applies to appeals against order under FERA and Rule 10 applies to appeals against an order under FEMA. Section 24 of the General Clauses Act,1897, therefore, protects operation of Rule 6 of the 1974 Rules and the Court Fees prescribed therein.