SCN Reply of Bushrah Export House

1
BEFORE THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, Princeton Business Park, IInd

Floor, 16- Ashok Marg (Near SIDBI), Lucknow - 226001
Written reply on behalf of
M/s Shri SyedAsif Ali

(Proprietor of M/s Busrah),
(Export House)
,4/19 Vikas Khand Gomti Nagar
Lucknow - 226010 ............Noticee
In the Matter of
Show Cause Notice- Cum- T -

3/92/MISC/LKZO/2018/AD(DK)/AEO()AK/1702 Order No.
dated 16.07.2019
INDEX
Sr. Description Page no.

No.
1. Reply
2. Annexure-I:
2
BEFORE THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, Princeton Business Park, IInd

Floor, 16- Ashok Marg (Near SIDBI), Lucknow - 226001
Written reply on behalf of
M/s M/s Shri SyedAsif Ali

(Proprietor of M/s Busrah),
(Export House)
,4/19 Vikas Khand Gomti Nagar ............Noticee
Lucknow - 226010 ,
In the Matter of
Show Cause Notice - Cum- Show Cause Notice- Cum- T -

3/92/MISC/LKZO/2018/AD(DK)/AEO()AK/1702 Order No.
dated 16.07.2019
Respected Sir,
BRIEF FACTS
1. M/s M/s M/s Shri SyedAsif Ali (Proprietor of M/s Busrah),(Export House)
,4/19 Vikas Khand Gomti Nagar(Hereinafter referred to as the Noticee), is an
Proprietor of M/s Busrah, Export House, issued by ENFORCEMENT
DIRECTORATE, under the Foreign Regulation Management Act, 1999.
2. The Noticee was asked by the Enforcement Department vide letter dated
17.07.2019 to supply details of business carried out by M/ Bushrah Export
House, copies of Income Tax Returns Filed by you Since FY-2010-11 to till
date, details of all bank accounts(along with bank account statement since
inception held in India and abroad, in the name of firm and you), details of all
forward inward remittances received against export since 01/04/2011, details
of foreign outward remittances from notices bank account since 01/04/2011,
copy of tri partite agreement with the buyer and remitter/consignee, copy of
invoice cum packing list, copy of bill of lading, copy of export declaration form
submitted to the AD bank, Status of realization of export proceeds.
3
3. In this backdrop, the Department issued a Show Cause Notice- Cum- wherein
the Department asked the noticee to furnish reasons as to why : That the
person was alleged under section 37 of the Foreign Exchange Management
act that gives the power to authorities to search and seize the documents-
1. The director of enforcement and other officers of enforcement, not below the
rank of an assistant director, shall take up for the investigation the
contravention referred to in section 12.
2. Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section 1, the central government

may also, by notification authorize any officer or class of officers in the central
government, state government or the reserve bank not below the rank of an
under secretary to the government of India to investigate the contravention
referred to in section 13.
3. The officers referred to in subsection (1) shall exercise the like powers which
are conferred on income tax authorities under the income tax act, 1961 and
exercise such powers subject to such limitation laid down under the act.
OUR SUBMISSIONS
4. NO REASONABLE GROUND AND NO EVIDENCE AGAINST THE

DEFENDANT - The Department has demanded with no reasonable ground to
submit the documents copy of bill of lading, Bank statement and other type of
documents (ANNEXURE - A )
a. In Bishnu Krishna Shrestha vs Union of India and ors.1 The safeguard

of a citizen against arbitrary action of a government officer is the phrase
'Reason to Believe' contained in section 37. The words of the section are
reason to believe and not reason to suspect this phrase has been used
merely to safeguard a citizen against arbitrary action of Government
officer. If this safeguard is not strictly adhered to, the statutory authority will
1
1987(27) E.L.T 369 (Cal.)
4
have unlimited power to enter and search the residence and office, home
of the citizen anywhere in India whenever he likes.
b. It is submitted that there shall be not mere suspicion rather reasonable

ground which shall be supported with the help of evidence against the
defendant to prove that he is guilt of any wrong but in the present case
there is neither reasonable ground nor any evidence.
5. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE ACTIONS ARE NOT JUSTIFIED - It is

submitted that if the authority has a "reason to believe" that the defendant is
believed to have done any wrong, then the actions of the enforcement
authority are justified, rather there is no such "reason to believe" and hence
the enforcement authority is not justified in their actions.
6. SELF INCARCERATION RULE

Article 20(3) in The Constitution Of India 1949
(3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness
against himself.
This provision may be stated to consist of the following three components:

1. it is a right pertaining to a person accused of an offence
2. it is a protection against compulsion to be a witness; and
3. it is a protection against such compulsion resulting in his giving evidence
against himself.
It is submitted that the article 20 (3) of the constitution of India states that the
person cannot be compelled against himself to produce the documents and if the
authorities do so then there shall be the reasonable ground, else this will be an
infringement of fundamental right, in the present case the authority is demanding
from the defendant to show the documents against himself without any reasonable
ground that is the infringement of the Fundamental Right.
5
7. DOCUMENTS ARE NOT ACTING AS EVIDENCE -

It is submitted that all the documents which are demanded by the enforcement
directorate are useless as these documents are much older dated 2011 which are
relevant to the present case.
8. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE IS HARASSING THE DEFENDANT -

It is submitted that the allegations against the defendant are not reasonable
allegations as there are no credentials to it, which have harassed the defendant, and
set the defendant into the mental trauma.
6
PRAYER
9. In view of the above submissions, it is respectfully prayed that all the

allegations which are alleged against the defendant by the enforcement
authority are baseless and there are no reasonable ground and evidence to
support the allegations, and hence the present matter shall disposed off.
10. It is also respectfully prayed that the order for presentation of documents are
not required as this leads to the harassment of the defendant person.
For M/s Proprietership of M/s Busrah
Authorized signatory

SCN Reply of Bushrah Export House

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCN Reply of Bushrah Export House

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCN Reply of Bushrah Export House

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

BEFORE THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, Princeton Business Park, IInd

Written reply on behalf of

M/s Shri SyedAsif Ali

Show Cause Notice- Cum- T -

Sr. Description Page no.

BEFORE THE ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, Princeton Business Park, IInd

Written reply on behalf of

M/s M/s Shri SyedAsif Ali

Show Cause Notice - Cum- Show Cause Notice- Cum- T -

2. Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section 1, the central government

4. NO REASONABLE GROUND AND NO EVIDENCE AGAINST THE

a. In Bishnu Krishna Shrestha vs Union of India and ors.1 The safeguard

b. It is submitted that there shall be not mere suspicion rather reasonable

5. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE ACTIONS ARE NOT JUSTIFIED - It is

6. SELF INCARCERATION RULE

This provision may be stated to consist of the following three components:

7. DOCUMENTS ARE NOT ACTING AS EVIDENCE -

8. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE IS HARASSING THE DEFENDANT -

9. In view of the above submissions, it is respectfully prayed that all the

For M/s Proprietership of M/s Busrah

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.