Cause was shown thereto by the appellant.
Appellant herein was served with a show cause numberice by the Enforcement Directorate on 04.07.1991 for alleged companytravention of the provisions of Section 9 1 b , 9 1 d and 9 3 of the Act, alleging, inter alia, that during the period June 1989 to July 1990, he caused to remit various payments aggregating to Rs.2,81,73,700/ to India from United Arab Emirates UAE through persons other than authorized dealers.
Penalty was also imposed on one Shri Champalal Singhvi.
The Special Director, however, adjudicated the matter and by an order dated 06.10.1993 imposed a penalty of Rs.2,50,000/ on the appellant in terms of Section 9 3 of the Act.
Aggrieved by and dissatisfied therewith, an appeal was preferred by the appellant before the Board.
It was further observed In our opinion, in view of the companyclusions already made by us that the charge of companytravention of section 9 3 cannot be made out on the basis of the facts as assumed by the Department, it is number necessary to companysider other grounds on which the adjudication order has been impugned in this appeal.
B. SINHA, J A short but an interesting question as to whether a Special Director appointed under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 for short, the Act himself can prefer an appeal before the High Court against an order passed by the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board for short, the Board arises for companysideration herein.
