Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973

90 judgments · newest first · showing 1–90

The Indian Hotels Company LimitedversusDirectorate of Enforcement

DISPOSED OFF

The Indian Hotels Company Ltd challenged two Show Cause Notices issued by a Directorate of Enforcement officer on 31 May 2002, arguing that they were issued after the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) had repealed the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA), and thus the officer …

SHRI. SURYAKANT RAVJI SHAH AND ANRversusSHRI. GAUTAM RAMCHANDRA DESAI AND ORS

Allowed

The petitioners sought relief against the Minister’s orders cancelling mutation entries and setting aside a sale of Mahar Watan land that had been transferred without the Collector’s prior sanction. The dispute centered on whether the 2002 amendment inserting Section 5(4) into the Bombay Inferior …

FIRST GLOBAL STOCKBROKING PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusANIL RISHIRAJ & ANR.

2023 INSC 845Dismissed

The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) repealed the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) but saved prosecutions for offences under sections 56 and 57 of FERA if cognizance was taken within two years of FEMA's commencement. An Enforcement Officer appointed under FERA filed a …

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusCITI BANK, N. A.

2022 INSC 1318Dismissed

Citi Bank, an authorized dealer under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA), accepted cash in foreign currency into the NRE account of a non‑resident Indian during October 1992‑January 1993. In 2002 the Enforcement Directorate issued a show‑cause notice alleging violations of several FERA …

ASHA JOHN DIVIANATHANversusVIKRAM MALHOTRA & ORS.

2021 INSC 121Appeal(s) allowed

Mrs. F.L. Raitt, a foreign national, sold a portion of her Indian immovable property to the predecessor of the appellant after obtaining prior RBI permission, but gifted another portion to respondent No.1 without such permission. The appellant and respondent No.4 sued to declare the gift deeds void; …

SHAILENDRA SWARUPversusTHE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

2020 INSC 465Appeal(s) allowed

Modi Xerox Ltd. made foreign exchange remittances in 1985 and was served a show‑cause notice under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) against the company and its directors. One of the directors, Shailendra Swarup, contended that he was a part‑time, non‑executive director and had no …

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusEXCHANGE CENTRE

2020 INSC 354Dismissed

The UAE Exchange Centre, a UAE company, obtained RBI permission under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act to operate liaison offices in India for limited functions such as receiving remittance data, printing cheques/drafts and couriering them to beneficiaries. The Authority for Advance Rulings held …

FERAversusM/S. PREMIER LIMITED (FORMERLY PREMIER AUTOMOBILES LTD.) & ORS.

2019 INSC 102Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed against a High Court order that had upheld the jurisdiction of the Special Director (Appeals) under FEMA to hear appeals against an adjudication order passed under Section 51 of the repealed FERA. The adjudication order, dated 5 December 2003, imposed a penalty on Godrej …

PUBLIC INTEREST FOUNDATION & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2018 INSC 862Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether it could compel Parliament to enact a law disqualifying candidates against whom serious criminal charges have been framed and whether it could direct the Election Commission to deny such candidates the use of a party's reserved symbol. The Court held that …

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIAversusA.K. BALALJI AND ORS.

2018 INSC 235Disposed off

The Bar Council of India appealed against orders allowing foreign law firms and lawyers to operate in India, arguing that the Advocates Act, 1961 restricts the practice of law to advocates enrolled with the Bar Council, covering both litigation and non‑litigation work. The Supreme Court examined …

VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2016 INSC 1177Appeal(s) allowed

Videocon Industries Ltd. and its directors were penalised by the adjudicating authority under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) for alleged violations of sections 18(2) and 18(3). They appealed before the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, which held that the transactions (purchase of …

VIJAY MALLYAversusENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, MIN. OF FINANCE

2015 INSC 493Dismissed

Vijay Mallya, Chairman of United Breweries Ltd., was summoned under Section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) to appear before the Enforcement Directorate regarding alleged violations of foreign exchange rules in a Benetton advertising agreement. He failed to appear on several …

A. TAJUDEENversusUNION OF INDIA

2014 INSC 702Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant A. Tajudeen was prosecuted under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 for allegedly receiving foreign exchange without an authorized dealer. The Enforcement Directorate relied on a purported statement made on 20‑April‑1989, statements recorded during a raid on 25‑Oct‑1989 and …

MIS. OPERA HOUSE EXPORTS LTD. ETC. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR. ETC.

2014 INSC 982Appeal(s) allowed

MIS Opera House Exports Ltd. and others were adjudicated under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) for alleged violations relating to export bill realizations. The adjudicating authority issued an order on 11 October 2007, which was served on the company on 25 October 2007. The company …

TULIP STAR HOTELS LTD.versusSPECIAL DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT

2014 INSC 29Appeal(s) allowed

Tulip Star Hotels Ltd. and its Executive Director were alleged to have sold US$147,000 and £1,000 to Hotel Zam Zam in 1997 through persons not authorized under the RBI's Foreign Exchange Management (FLM) memorandum, violating sections 6(4), 6(5), 7 and 8 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 …

ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWALversusNEERAJ KUMAR & ANR.

2013 INSC 771Disposed off

The appellant, a former Deputy Director of the Enforcement Directorate, alleged that respondents deliberately suppressed material facts about a mistaken Interpol notice, causing him to remain in judicial custody for 36 days. He filed a criminal contempt petition under Article 215 of the …

KAMLESH KUMAR AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

2013 INSC 654Dismissed

The petitioners, children of a former Director of Animal Husbandry, were charged under Section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) for receiving foreign exchange. While the cases were pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the State Government, with the High Court's resolution, …

UNION OF INDIAversusABN AMRO BANK AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 462Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India prosecuted M/s Maple Leaf Trading International Pvt. Ltd. and its foreign shareholders for trading imported gold coins without RBI permission, alleging violations of Sections 19(1)(a), 19(1)(d), 29(1)(b), 47(1), 49(1)(a) and 68 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The …

JIJU KURUVILA & ORS.versusKUNJUJAMMA MOHAN & ORS

2013 INSC 409Disposed off

The claimants, the wife, children and mother of Joy Kuruvila, who died in a road accident while employed in the US, filed a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking a sum in Indian rupees. The key issues were the appropriate date for fixing the foreign exchange rate to …

M/S TELESTAR TRAVELS PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusSPECIAL DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT

2013 INSC 98Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by Telestar Travels Pvt. Ltd. and its directors challenging the adjudication order under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) that found them guilty of dealing in foreign exchange without RBI permission and of using a paper company, Bountiful Ltd., to route …

SATYA JAIN (D) THR. LRS. & ORS.versusANIS AHMED RUSHDIE (D) TR.LRS. & ORS.

2012 INSC 555Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a suit for specific performance of a 1970 agreement to sell a Delhi bungalow. The plaintiffs argued they were ready to fulfil their obligations, while the defendant claimed the suit was time‑barred and that the plaintiffs breached clause 7 by not paying an additional Rs 1 …

RADHEYSHYAM KEJRIWALversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR.

2011 INSC 133Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Radheshyam Kejriwal, was investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for alleged violations of Sections 8(2) and 9(1)(f)(i) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA). An adjudication proceeding under Section 51 concluded that the charges were not sustainable and the ED …

VINOD SOLANKIversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2008 INSC 1473Appeal(s) allowed

Vinod Solanki's office was searched and cash seized; he subsequently made statements to Enforcement officials under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) admitting to foreign exchange remittances, but later retracted those statements alleging coercion. The authorities imposed a Rs 10 lakh …

MONOTOSH SAHAversusSPECIAL DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE AND ANR.

2008 INSC 959Disposed off

Monotosh Saha was penalised Rs 25 lakhs for alleged contravention of Section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The Special Director ordered the penalty and the Appellate Tribunal required a 60% pre‑deposit to entertain the appeal. Saha contended that the pre‑deposit caused undue …

M/S. BHARAT CARPETSversusDIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

2008 INSC 767Dismissed

M/s Bharat Carpets, a partnership firm, and its two partners were penalised for failing to repatriate export proceeds amounting to Rs.5,12,171 within the six‑month period prescribed under Section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The firm contended that it had taken steps for …

M/S. SEEMA SILK & SAREES & ANR.versusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT & ORS.

2008 INSC 632Dismissed

M/s. Seema Silk & Sarees, a partnership firm, and its partner were penalised under Sections 18(2) and 18(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 for failing to repatriate export proceeds within the prescribed period. They challenged the constitutional validity of these provisions, arguing …

GURCHARAN SINGHversusDIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE

2008 INSC 434Dismissed

Gurcharan Singh, a customs officer, along with others, created fictitious firms to claim a duty drawback of Rs 1.04 crore for allegedly exported readymade garments that were over‑invoiced and of inferior quality. A complaint under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act led to cognizance by a …

S.K. SINHA, CHIEF ENFORCEMENT OFFICERversusMIS. VIDEOCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. & ORS.

2008 INSC 105Case Allowed

The Chief Enforcement Officer filed a criminal complaint under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) against Videocon International Ltd. on May 24, 2002. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on the same day and later issued summons on February 3, 2003. The accused …

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusADANI EXPORTS LTD. & ANR.

2007 INSC 1142Disposed off

The Union of India issued show‑cause notices under the Customs Act, 1962 alleging mis‑declaration, over‑invoicing and misuse of foreign exchange by Adani Exports Ltd. The adjudicating authority imposed penalties under Section 50 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 read with Sections 49(3) …

MOHTESHAM MOHD. ISMAILversusSPL. DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE AND ANR.

2007 INSC 1019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Mohtesham Mohd. Ismail, was served with a show‑cause notice under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) for allegedly remitting funds from the UAE through unauthorized persons and was penalised by the Special Director of Enforcement under section 9(3). He appealed to the …

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM, NEW DELHIversusM/S BROOKS INTERNA TI ON AL AND ORS.

2007 INSC 665Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned appeals by the Commissioner of Customs against the confiscation of a consignment of readymade garments exported by Mis Brooks International for duty drawback. The revenue authorities seized the goods, invoking Sections 113(c) and (d) of the Customs Act, 1962, alleging that the …

K. KRISHNA M.A. RALHANYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 611Disposed off

The appellant, K. Krishna M.A. RAIHANY, applied for Indian citizenship by naturalization under Section 6(1) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. He alleged that no order had been passed on his application, while the Union of India and the State of Maharashtra contended that a communication dated 29 August …

MUKESH TIKAJI BORAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 408Dismissed

The appellant challenged the preventive detention of his brother Bherchand Tikaji Bora under Section 3(1) of COFEPOSA, arguing that the detenu had been fully exonerated in adjudication proceedings under FERA and that this should nullify the detention order. The High Court dismissed the writ, holding …

STATE CBIversusSASHI BALASUBRAMANIAN AND ANR.

2006 INSC 771Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from allegations of irregularities in the grant of an advance licence for import of cotton fabrics, leading to a criminal complaint against a company, its directors and four public servants under the IPC, Prevention of Corruption Act and Customs Act. The company and its directors …

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, A.P.versusSURESH JHUNJHUNWALA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 727Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, exporters of garments under the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) scheme, filed shipping bills claiming export benefits, but the goods were intercepted and found to be cheap garments grossly mis‑declared and heavily over‑invoiced. The Commissioner of Customs ordered confiscation of …

D.ANURADHAversusJOINT SECRETARY AND ANR.

2006 INSC 239Dismissed

The appellant, D. Anuradha, challenged the preventive detention of her husband under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974, alleging procedural violations. She contended that the reference to the COFEPOSA Advisory Board was made after …

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND ORS.versusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ORS.

2006 INSC 103Dismissed

Standard Chartered Bank and its officers challenged show‑cause notices issued under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) alleging that Sections 50, 51, 56 and 68 were unconstitutional as they violated Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The Bank argued that FERA, being in the Ninth …

M/S. GEORGE WILLIAMSON (ASSAM) LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GAUHATI

2005 INSC 430Appeal(s) allowed

Mis. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. acquired the Indian undertakings of twelve UK‑registered tea companies under a scheme of arrangement approved by the High Courts and the RBI, which required that the net assets of the acquired business not be depleted. The consideration paid (Rs 490 lakhs) was …

M/S. DALE AND CARRINGTON INVT. P. LTD. AND ANOTHERversusP.K. PRATHAPAN AND OTHERS

2004 INSC 515Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of M/s. Dale & Carrington Investments Pvt. Ltd. and its Managing Director P.K. Ramanujam, upholding the Kerala High Court’s order that the allotment of 6,865 equity shares to Ramanujam was invalid. The Court held that no valid Board meeting had taken place, …

SINGER INDIA LTD.versusCHANDER MOHAN CHADHA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 447Dismissed

The landlord sued Singer India Ltd for eviction under Section 14(1)(b) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, alleging that the American tenant had transferred possession to the Indian company without the landlord's written consent. The transfer resulted from a court‑sanctioned amalgamation compelled by a …

THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR AND ANR.versusMOHD. GHULAM GHOUSE AND ANR.

2004 INSC 28Appeal(s) allowed

Respondent No. I filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging a show‑cause notice issued by the Special Director of the Enforcement Directorate under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 and the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, and sought an interim injunction restraining …

HARDIE TRADING LTD. AND ANR.versusADDISONS PAINT AND CHEMICALS LTD.

2003 INSC 476Appeal(s) allowed

Hardie Trading Ltd. (Hardie) owned the trademarks "Spartan" and "Spartan Velox" and a warrior device, which it used in India under a 1946 collaboration agreement with Addisons Paint and Chemicals Ltd. (Addisons). After the agreement lapsed, Addisons applied to delete Hardie's marks under s.46 of the …

UNION OF INDIAversusR. PADMANABHAN

2003 INSC 387Case Partly allowed

The Union of India issued a 1985 Reward Scheme for informers and government servants involved in seizures under the Customs, Central Excise & Salt, Gold Control and Foreign Exchange Regulation Acts, later amended in 1989 to cap rewards at Rs 1 lakh per seizure and Rs 10 lakh in a career. IPS officer …

M/S. OM PRAKASH BHATIAversusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, DELHI

2003 INSC 306Dismissed

The appellant, O.P. Bhatia, exported ladies' skirts and declared a value far above the domestic market price, subsequently claiming a large drawback. The Customs Commissioner found that the export value was deliberately over‑invoiced, treated the goods as prohibited, confiscated them and imposed a …

HIRA LAL HARI LAL BHAGWATI.versusC.B.I., NEW DELHI

2003 INSC 275Appeal(s) allowed

The Gujarat Cancer Society imported MRI and lithotripsy machines under a customs duty exemption certificate that required the equipment to be used by the "actual user". The Customs Collector later held the society liable for duty but, considering its charitable purpose, imposed only a token fine and …

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANKversusINDIAN BANK AND ANR.

2003 INSC 249Appeal(s) allowed

Punjab National Bank (PNB) sued Indian Bank and Indo‑Europe Foods Ltd for recovery of a US‑dollar bank guarantee amounting to USD 5,237,284.54. The plaint sought a decree in US dollars with rupee equivalents for court‑fee and jurisdiction purposes. PNB later applied to amend the pleading to delete …

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusVENKATESHAN S. AND ANR.

2002 INSC 216Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India detained B. Sankar under Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) for alleged hawala transactions involving Rs. 42.9 lakh. The Karnataka High Court set aside the detention, holding that the underlying offence …

MOTI LALversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR.

2002 INSC 188Dismissed

Motilal was arrested for possessing skins of protected wildlife under several provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The Central Government, invoking the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, issued a notification and, with the consent of the Uttar Pradesh Government, transferred the …

SOLIDAIRE INDIA LTD.versusFAIRGROWTH FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. AND ORS.

2001 INSC 76Dismissed

Solidaire India Ltd. had taken three loans from Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. and claimed that the agreed interest rate was 18% per annum. The Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions and Securities) Act, 1992, awarded interest at 21.5% and 23% respectively, which the appellant …

M/S ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

2001 INSC 47Disposed off

The appellants, Indian public corporations engaged in manufacturing, imported technical drawings, designs and manuals from foreign collaborators on media such as paper and diskettes under technical collaboration agreements. The Customs Commissioner issued show‑cause notices under Section 28(1) of …

SEA PEARL INDUSTRIES AND ORS., ETCversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN

2001 INSC 10Dismissed

Sea Pearl Industries, a processor of seafood, entered into an agreement with an eligible export house to export its processed products. The export house opened a Letter of Credit in its own name, which was later endorsed to Sea Pearl and the foreign exchange credited to its account. Sea Pearl …

K. RAMULLANversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN

2000 INSC 384Appeal(s) allowed

K. Ramullan, an Indian-origin Malaysian citizen, owned a Non‑Resident (External) Account in an Indian bank and stayed in India with his wife for medical treatment from June 1982 to April 1985. He claimed exemption from tax on the interest earned under Section 10(4A) of the Income Tax Act, arguing …

ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE AND ANR.versusM. SAMBA SIVA RAO AND ORS.

2000 INSC 305Appeal(s) allowed

The Enforcement Directorate issued summons under Section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 to M. Samba Siva Rao and others, who refused to comply with the directions. The Delhi High Court held that such refusal did not attract Section 56 of the Act and dismissed the complaints. On …

UNION BANK OF INDIAversusM/S. SEPPO RALLY OY AND ORS.

1999 INSC 441Appeal(s) allowed

The Union Bank of India issued a bank guarantee for Dany Dairy & Food Engineers Ltd., which was later invoked by Seppo Rally OY, a Finnish company. Payment under the guarantee was delayed because the bank had to obtain permission from the Reserve Bank of India to remit the amount in foreign exchange …

THE COCA-COLA EXPORT CORPORATIONversusINCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANR.

1998 INSC 162Appeal(s) allowed

Coca‑Cola Export Corp., a wholly‑owned non‑resident subsidiary of the Coca‑Cola Company, claimed deductions for pro‑rated home‑office expenses and service charges paid in US dollars. The Income‑Tax Officer (ITO) disallowed portions of these deductions and later issued notices under Section 148 of …

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusV.C. SHUKLA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 119Dismissed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) relied on two spiral notebooks and related documents recovered from J.K. Jain's premises to charge politicians V.C. Shukla and L.K. Advani, alleging they received bribes through a hawala scheme. The Supreme Court examined whether the notebooks qualified as …

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENTversusASHOK KUMAR JAIN AND VICE VERSA

1998 INSC 9Appeal(s) allowed

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) seized documents from Ashok Kumar Jain’s residence under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) and issued repeated summons for his interrogation. Jain, citing deteriorating health, applied for anticipatory bail, which was dismissed by the Sessions Court. …

C. SAMPATH KUMARversusTHE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, MADRAS

1997 INSC 659Dismissed

The appellant was served a summons under Section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, requiring him to appear before the Enforcement Officer and give a written, signed statement. He challenged the summons, contending that he could not be compelled to provide a written statement, alleging …

DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANR.versusP.V. PRABHAKAR RAO

1997 INSC 594Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, P.V. Prabhakar Rao, feared arrest in connection with a massive urea‑related foreign exchange fraud and sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court granted an interim order, later making it absolute, …

M/S COX AND KINGS LTD. AND ANR.versusSMT. CHANDER MALHOTRA

1996 INSC 1475Dismissed

The premises were originally leased to Cox & Kings (Agents) Ltd., a foreign company incorporated in the United Kingdom. After the Reserve Bank of India denied permission for the foreign company to continue its business under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, the leasehold interest was …

M/S J.B. BODA AND CO. PVT. LTD.versusCENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, NEW DELHI

1996 INSC 1254Appeal(s) allowed

Mis J.B. Boda & Co. Pvt. Ltd., a reinsurance broker, received a commission in US dollars after deducting its fee from the gross reinsurance premium it remitted to foreign reinsurers with RBI approval. The company claimed that the retained commission constituted "income received in convertible …

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1996 INSC 698Dismissed

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) sought permission under Section 155(2) of the CrPC to investigate alleged violations of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) by Shri Arvind Singh Mewar, who was accused of purchasing property and incurring expenses abroad without RBI approval. The …

S.K. KAMDAR AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1995 INSC 540Dismissed

The appellants were charged with violations of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 and the Indian Penal Code section 120‑B. A complaint was filed under the corresponding provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The trial court dismissed the complaint, holding that the 1947 and …

HINDUSTAN LEVER EMPLOYEES' UNIONversusHINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED AND ORS

1994 INSC 483Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered the sanction of a scheme of amalgamation between Tata Oil Mills Company Ltd. (TOMCO) and Hindustan Lever Ltd. (HLL), a subsidiary of the foreign multinational Unilever. The petitioners – nominal TOMCO shareholders, employee unions and consumer groups – challenged the …

P.V. MOHAMMAD BARMAY SONSversusDIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT

1992 INSC 215Dismissed

The firm P.V. Mohammad Barmay Sons owned three vessels and, without Reserve Bank of India permission, purchased and fitted foreign engines, contravening Sections 5(1)(a) and (b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. A raid in 1974 led to a notice, show‑cause proceedings and a penalty of Rs …

POOLPANDI ETC. ETC.versusSUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL EXCISE AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 159Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether a person questioned under the Customs Act, 1962 or the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 is entitled to the assistance of a lawyer. The petitioners argued that denial of counsel violated Article 20(3) and Article 21 of the Constitution, while the Department …

MJ. EXPORTS LTD. AND ANR.versusCUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE

1992 INSC 162Dismissed

MJ Exports Ltd., a recognised trading house, imported haemodialysers from West Germany under an Open General Licence (OGL) for "stock and sale" and cleared them for "home consumption" free of duty. The goods were repacked in India and exported to the USSR. Customs detained the goods, deeming the …

K.T.M.S. MOHD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA

1992 INSC 134Appeal(s) allowed

The Enforcement Directorate seized Rs.4,28,713 in 1966 and recorded statements from appellants K.T.S. Mohammed and M. Jamal Mohammed under Section 39 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA). Both appellants later retracted those statements, claiming they were obtained under duress, and the …

BURN STANDARD COMPANY LIMITEDversusMCDERMOTT INTERNATIONAL INC. AND ANOTHER

1991 INSC 87Dismissed

Burn Standard Company Ltd., a Government undertaking, entered into a technical collaboration agreement with McDermott International Inc. to obtain foreign technical know‑how, requiring RBI permission under Section 28(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA). The agreement received …

M. AHAMEDKUTTYversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

1990 INSC 24Appeal(s) allowed

M. Ahamedkuti was intercepted for smuggling gold and was granted bail on 12‑Feb‑1988. The Kerala Home Secretary later issued a detention order under COFEPOSA on 25‑Jun‑1988, which was executed on 2‑Aug‑1988. The appellant challenged the order on grounds of unexplained delays in passing and executing …

NARENDRA KUMAR MAHESHWARIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1989 INSC 178Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the Controller of Capital Issues' (CCI) consent to Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd.'s (RPL) issue of fully convertible debentures, which petitioners alleged was granted with undue haste, without proper application of mind, and in violation of non‑statutory …

ASLAM AHMED ZAHIRE AHMED SHAIKversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1989 INSC 122Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was detained under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 for allegedly facilitating unauthorized foreign exchange transactions. He filed a representation against his detention, which he handed to the Superintendent of the …

HARIDAS AMARCHAND SHAH OF BOMBAYversusK.L. VERMA & ORS.

1988 INSC 363Dismissed

The Enforcement Directorate searched the appellant's house and seized currency, bank drafts, bank pass books and loose sheets. The appellant was arrested, gave a statement, later retracted it, and was released on bail with a condition to attend the Enforcement Department daily, which was …

VIJAY PRAKASH D. MEHTA & ANR.versusCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE), BOMBAY

1988 INSC 223Dismissed

The appellants, Indian citizens residing abroad, were caught with large amounts of foreign exchange and were penalised Rs 3 lakhs each under the Customs Act. They appealed the penalty under s.129A, and the Customs Appellate Tribunal, invoking s.129E, reduced the security deposit to Rs 1 lakh each. …

ASHOK KUMARversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1988 INSC 24Appeal(s) allowed

Ashok Kumar was detained under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 on allegations of illegal foreign‑currency and gold transactions. The grounds of detention were served on 21 March 1987, but the material documents on which the …

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND 0THERSversusADITYA V. BIRLA

1987 INSC 351Dismissed

Aditya V. Birla, a technician, entered into a three‑year agreement with Thai Rayon Company to provide services in Bangkok and sought approval from the Indian Government to claim a deduction under Section 80RRA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Government refused, contending that the provision applied …

PUSHPADEVI M. JATIAversusM.L. WADHAVAN, ADDL. SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS.

1987 INSC 141Dismissed

Mohanlal Jatia was detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA) on the basis of documents seized from his brother‑in‑law and statements recorded by R.C. Singh of the Enforcement Directorate. His wife, Pushpadevi Jatia, challenged the …

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusESCORTS LTD, & ORS.

1985 INSC 251Disposed off

The case concerned the purchase of shares in Escorts Ltd by thirteen overseas companies, predominantly owned by non‑resident Indians, under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) portfolio investment scheme. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) later granted permission for the purchases, which …

FORASOLversusOIL & NATURAL GAS COMMISSION (AND VICE VERSA)

1983 INSC 162Disposed off

Forasol, a French company, entered into a drilling contract with ONGC that required most payments in French Francs and 20% in Indian rupees at a fixed rate. After the rupee was devalued, Forasol claimed a higher conversion rate, which the arbitrator awarded without specifying a rate for the Franc …