Rajesh Kumar Ishwar Parikh Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
The Learned Authorized Representative in his submission also confirmed that Rs.19.91 Lacs were shown as Cash in hand in the books of Partnership Firm of both the appellants therefore, the source of fund for procuring the foreign currency was available with the appellants. The only lapse on the part of the appellant is that they have not obtained the permission from RBI. I also find that the export of foreign currency is allowed subject to permission of RBI.
As per their statements that they were taking this foreign currency for business purpose which is otherwise permitted by the Reserve Bank of India therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant had any malafide intention to export the foreign currency as they do not have any gain even if permission is not obtained. As regard the judgments cited by Learned Authorized Representative regarding absolute confiscation of foreign currency, I find that there is no trite law that in each and every case the confiscation of goods should be made absolute. The issue that whether confiscation of goods should be made absolute or conditional such as redemption on payment of fine has to be decided on the basis of facts of each case. It is also not in dispute that the judgments cited by the learned counsel hold that the foreign currency can be released on payment of fine in lieu of confiscation. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of present case I am of the view that appellant is entitle for release of foreign currencies on payment of fine. Accordingly, as regard the appeal of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Ishwar Parikh I hold that the confiscated foreign currencies has to be released on payment of fine of Rs.2 Lacs. Similarly, the confiscated foreign currency from Mr. Ashish Kumar DahyaBhai Patel has to be released on payment of fine of Rs. 1.0 Lacs.
