Court : Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi
..... that an agreement stipulating placing of some money in the hands of the third party outside india cannot ipso facto result in violation of foreign exchange regulation act for the reason that in order to constitute violation of fera or to directly or indirectly avoid in any manner the operation of any provisions of fera or of any rule or direction thereunder, it has to be established that by virtue of the agreement what was intended to be put in the hands of the third party was in fact the money belonging to or owned by a person to whom fera applies ..... collective reading of the agreement as also various documents referred to above and on record establishes that what was intended under the agreement to be put in the hands of allied petro was not the money of the rr but of sc and that allied petro was to act as an independent third party to hold the money in the interregnum until rr became entitled to or perfected its right to receive the fee." 5. ..... hence, it is established beyond any reasonable doubt, that rr in fact, acquired the commission worth us $ 13,83,672.11 on the respective dates when it was remitted in parts to the london account of allied petro; and that the above act of rr tentamounts to otherwise transfer of the commission amount to us $ 13,83,672.11 by rr to a person other than an authorised dealer besides its failure to offer or cause to be offered for sale the aforesaid commission amounting to us $ 13,83,672.11 within the stipulated period. .....
Tag this Judgment!