1 fera127-06 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FERA APPEAL NO. 127 OF 2006 Union of India .. Appellant V/s. Ramnik H. Koria .. Respondent ...... Mr. A. S. Rao with Ms. S. V. Bharucha for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. ...... CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 16, 2010. P.C. : Perused the Appeal. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. None appears for the Respondent. 2. The Appeal is directed against the order dated 27th December, 1995 passed by the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board (the Board) in Appeal No. 76 of 1995. 2 fera127-06 3. The Appellate Board, after considering the rival submissions, have recorded categorically the findings in paragraph No. 5 that there was no adequate evidence to come to the conclusion that the appellant made payment to the two non-residents as alleged in the show cause notice, consequently, a benefit of doubt has been given to the Respondent. 4. Apart from the above, after considering the rival submissions on merits, the Board recorded the conclusions, reading as under : “7. Since the charge of contravention of section 9 (1) (a) cannot be made out as discussed above, I do not consider it necessary to deal with other contentions advanced by Shri Mehta. In the result, both the appeals are allowed and the impugned orders against which these appeals have been filed are set aside. The respondents are directed to refund to the appellant the amount of Rs. 70,000/- each deposited by him in pursuance of the 2 impugned orders, within 45 days of the receipt of this order.” 3 fera127-06 3. Having examined the impugned order and the material available on record, it is not possible to hold that the impugned order is perverse or that it gives rise to the substantial question of law. 4. In the result, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)