M/S Kaypee Exporters vs Enforcement Directorate on 26 March, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT G? KARNATAKH AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS was 26" am or MARCH 2009
among

THE Howaua MR. JUSTICE K.RNmNNA"-« _f

rm; No.5a1sx2oo4:FE:-my    %

BETWEEN:

H."8.KM'l{EE mcponmns
:ea.1*I'm, 12" 2! 1-n.n.::~:

I-Ih"'Il

HRL II STAGE

R1 Iifii I' III'

nnnuhuunfi - 36$ 66%
BY ITS PAfiTNER _ , ;,vv .a,
flfi.F.??EfiEfi3ifi  *_ ;"""w  ;;f._ I  7'fiP?ELLfifiT

:3? am P.V,G£}NJ}iL:_._V§  mo?
PRESENT)      I  

  . . ' .  'I 

zmyoncsnznw%nzgzcTa2»T§a"*M
N 

Fflflfilfi EKQHHHEEyMAN&GEMEflT BET
fiG.9f1, HRBRA5 Bfiflfi REA?"
fififlfifihflflfi - 559 001
;,fi? fiEEUT?'HiRECTfifi '. .. RE3?GfiflEfiT

 =._V:n*{ ~.sa3:: fiemnmsmm msnnv, 

",?i*E-I1s_.')~':'::.r{ IS FILED uxs.35 or THE FOREIGN

 '_miCHF'ii5§1SE»-..' mmamnur MIT AGAINST THE omamz DATED

2§=3=2QQ4;EA55EQ IN AEEEAL N0.206fD3 ON THE FILE

"--«u:;:1'zr.. THE ';a1=msL.r..A'rrs TRIBUNAL 1-'cm ronnxan zxcrmms,
 "-mm asnucms  P"""-"":' TIL 95.40.9901»

-Q5'-I-3 I-ISIJ. uuu Illl

'.nma:naT THE APPELLANT FIRM IMPOSED run cnmnsns or
=_*~v1uLaT1nw 0? SECTI E 13:25 ARE 13:3: cg THE
'»zoE31mm nxcunnas nnsunnrxon new Ann THE Arrsunnuw

-_  yHiREIN PERTE T0 3:? fisifii TEE aaovfi fififlii fififi
"«=HflLD THAT THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION

OF SECTION 19(2) HIV. SECTION 19(3) OF THE FERE.
-40

A2"

\



MFR COMING ON FOR 'HEHRING THIS DRY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOiING:--

JUDGMENT

fiéfii éallad “w1’i. haua raprasantswanflbé;a;;

af bath the parties. fippaal fiisniéaéd far §mfi;, f

prcsacutian.