- (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 9th February, 2011 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 342 of 2009 etc. By the impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeals preferred by the appellants herein and upheld the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange (hereinafter referred to as the, 'Tribunal') on the ground that the appeals were filed beyond the period of 90 days from the date of service of adjudication order.
(3.)The factual matrix of the case is as follows :-
The State Bank of India, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi by its XOS statement dated 21.01.1995 disclosed that the appellant-M/s Opera House Exports Ltd.. D-12/2. Okhla Industrial Area. Phase-II. New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the. Company') did not realize substantial amount of its export bills and that the bills pending realization were for the period 1991 to 1994. Since it was found that there was a prima facie case of violation of Section 18(2) & 18 (3) of the FERA by the Company, the respondent initiated inquiries against the Company with regard to the export bills pending realization, reasons for pendency and steps taken for realizing the said bills. During the course of investigation, a directive u/S. 33 (2) of FERA was issued to the Company on 23.02.1996 in response to which the Company requested for time till 14.04.1996 for furnishing the requisite details. It was alleged that since no reply was furnished by the Company even by the said date summons was issued to the Directors of the Company on 16.05.1996, which also evoked no response from the Company. Summons was, therefore, issued to the Managing Director of the Company for his appearance on 10.09.1996. Since there was no compliance of the same, another summons was issued for his appearance on 30.09.1996. In response to the said summons, Mr. Sushil Kumar, Managing Director of the Company vide letter dated 28.09.1996, authorized Mrs. Rakesh Verma, General Manager (Finance) and Mr. Y.K. Jha, Manager (Export) to represent him ie matter. On 30.09.1996 Smt. Rakesh Verma, General Manager (Finance) attended the Directorate's Office and her statement was recorded u/S. 40 of the FERA. She explained the matter and also furnished copy of a letter dated 30.04.1996 from the State Bank of India (For short, 'SBI'), confirming realization of an amount of Rs. 9,72,203/- pertaining to the exports made during the period 1992-1995.

Thereafter, summons was issued to Mr. Sushil Kumar again u/S. 40 of the FERA for appearance on 19.08.1999. The Company vide letter dated 19.08.1999 informed that Mr. Sushil Kumar had resigned from the post of Managing Director and Mr. Jitinder Kumar Sharma had taken over as Managing Director. The appellant vide letter dated 27.03.2000 again requested RBI to write off and to issue necessary instruction to SBI. Thereafter summons were again issued u/S. 40 of the FERA on 17.07.2000 to three Directors of the Company asking them to appear on 30.07.2000. Simultaneously, enquiries u/S. 33 (2) of FERA were also made with the authorized dealers-SBI, Phase-II, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi. The Bank vide letter dated 30.08.2000 submitted details of the export bills pending realization together with copies of relevant GRs. It was alleged that number of opportunities had been provided to the Company and its representatives to appear personally and explain the reasons for the outstanding export bills, steps taken for realization of the pending proceeds etc. But the Company did not avail those opportunities and failed to furnish any information.

The SBI, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi by its XOS statement dated 30.08.2000 revealed that US$ 109353.88, Italian Lira 5952000, DM. 2738842.85, FR.F.573129, UK Pounds 3302 and CBF.4354 equivalent to Rs. 1,38,09,274/- was pending realization on account of exports made by the Company during the period from 1991 to 1998. The Company was given number of opportunities but did not furnish any evidence or explanations for having taken any steps for realization of the said export bills. Further, no correspondence was furnished for having taken any steps for obtaining extension from RBI for delay in realization of the proceeds. It was, therefore, found that the Company had contravened the provisions of Section 18(2) read with Central Government Notification Nos. F.I/67/EC/73-1&3, both dated 1.1.1974 and Section 18(3) of the FERA. Directors of the Company were found to have contravened the aforesaid provisions of the FERA. Memorandum No. T-4/32-D/2001 was, therefore, issued to the Company on 2.05.2001 for contravention of Section 18(2) read with Central Government Notification No. F.I/67/ EC/73-1&3, both dated 1.01.1974 and Section 18(3) of the FERA. A number of Directors of the Company were charged for said contraventions of the FERA.

The Company filed interim reply dated 2.06.2001 and submitted that it was one of the leading exporters of high fashion readymade garments and it had exported garments worth more than Rs. 235 crores during the last 8 years of business. The Company accepted that small amounts were pending realization in respect of exports made to various buyers. It was also submitted that the percentage of outstanding claims was negligible on comparing with the total exports made. The Company explained the detailed steps taken by it towards realization of proceeds.