Page 108 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

442 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

without prejudice to one another and are in addition to the facts and sub-
mission set forth hereinabove
(1) That the Notice was a decorative part time non-executive Director and
the Board Meetings attended by him have only been in his capacity as
a part-time non-executive Director and not in any other capacity. The
Noticee was never in the employment of the company and never ever
had nay executive role or function in the Company. A copy of the Af-
fidavit filed by the noticee with his reply to Show Cause Notice No.
T-4/337/DZ/2002, dated 28-5-2002 of the Company Secretary of XMC
at the time to its swearing confirming that the Noticee was only a
part-time Director of MXL and was never in charge of the day to day
business of MXL is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure - ‘C’ .
This Notice has been never engaged in day to day conduct of the
business of MXL. He has never entered into any import agreement.
He has never issued any instructions to any person or the bank for
causing any remittance abroad and as such he is not responsible for li-
able at all in any manner.
(2) It is respectfully submitted that the documents enclosed with MXL’s
reply of 4-12-1991, 25-12-1991, 25-12-1991 and 9-7-1993 and XMC’s re-
ply dated 26-3-2001 will establish that goods have been imported
against the remittances mentioned in the Annexure and they had been
duly reported to Reserve Bank of India and there is no evidence of
goods not having been imported.
(3) This Noticee was never in charge of the day to day business of MXL
and had no knowledge of the transactions in respect of which the
above referred Show Cause Notice dated 8-10-2003 had been issued
much less any intent or knowledge of alleged contraventions as set
forth therein. The certificates of compliances given by MXL manage-
ment to the Board prove and establish that the contraventions alleged
in the above referred Notice and the subject Memorandum, in any
view of the matter if occurred, were without the knowledge and had
nothing to do with the transactions in question, the question of this
Noticee committing consciously or deliberately any contravention of
the FERA or any other law or regulations does not arise and no penal-
ty can in law be imposed on this Noticee. The adjudication proceed-
ings are otherwise not maintainable in law.”
24. After noticing the above plea of the appellant, the Adjudicating Au-
thority has noticed that letter dated 26-3-2001 of the Company Secretary where
he has given the names of 13 Directors and after noticing the aforesaid 13 Direc-
tors the Adjudicating Authority has recorded its conclusion in following words :
“I have also gone through the replies received from other directors and
found that they were not responsible for day to day activities of the compa-
ny and were not the Directors during the relevant period which was be-
tween 12-6-1985 to 21-11-1985 and they were the nominees of IFCI, GIC,
ICICI, UTI and IDBI respectively, hence, I drop the charges against the Di-
rectors except S/Sh. Bhupinder Kumar Modi, Umesh Kumar Modi, John
Rodger Miligan, James Campbell White and Shailendra Swarup who were
Directors at relevant time and responsible for working of the M/s. Modi
Xerox Ltd., I hereby find them guilty and impose a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lakh only) each on S/Sh. Bhupinder Kumar Modi, Umesh
Kumar Modi, John Rodger Miligan, James Campbell White and Shailendra

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  108