S. N. AGARWAL, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal filed by the Union of India through directorate of Enforcement, Delhi zone under Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange management Act, 1999 (in short `fema') against an order dated 26. 8. 2005 passed against the respondent by the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange. ( 2 ) THE appellant had issued two show cause notices termed as show cause notice No. I and show cause notice No. II upon M/s. Emkay Fashions, New delhi and M/s. Emkay Fashions (P) Ltd. , New Delhi. Show cause notice No. I was issued to the Company M/s. Emkay Fashions (P) Ltd. , New Delhi and show cause notice No. II was issued to the firm M/s. Emkay Fashions, alleged to be a partnership firm. Contravention of Section 18 (2) read with Section 68 (1) of fera was alleged in the above show cause notices. The adjudicating authority disposed of both the aforementioned show cause notices by a common judgment at pages 25 to 40 of the paper book. The operative portion of the said judgment reads as under:-"i, therefore, hold that M/s. Emkay Fashions, New Delhi and emkay Fashions (P) Ltd. New Delhi have contravened the provisions of Section 18 (2) of Foreign Regulation Act, 1973 as alleged in the show cause notice No. I and II as they have refrained from taking action which has the effect of securing that the export value is not received in India. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I impose upon M/s. Emkay Fashions a penalty of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand only ). In addition, I impose upon Shri subhash Kapoor, a penalty of Rs. 10,000/ (Rupees ten thousand only) for contravention of Section 18 (2) read with section 68 (1) of the said Act as he was the person in-charge of and responsible to the concern for the conduct of its business at the relevant time. In respect of SCN II, I impose upon Messrs. Emkay fasions (P) Ltd. New Delhi a penalty of Rs. 1,12,000/- (Rupees one lakh twelve thousand only ). The facts of the case do not call for imposition of a separate penalty on individual Directors. " ( 3 ) THE respondent was aggrieved by imposition of penalty of rs. In respect of SCN II, I impose upon Messrs. Emkay fasions (P) Ltd. New Delhi a penalty of Rs. 1,12,000/- (Rupees one lakh twelve thousand only ). The facts of the case do not call for imposition of a separate penalty on individual Directors. " ( 3 ) THE respondent was aggrieved by imposition of penalty of rs. 10,000/- upon him by the adjudicating authority and he, therefore, preferred an appeal being Appeal No. 217/1989 before the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign exchange alleging that the Show Cause Notice No. II at Page 41 of the paper book was not addressed to him and, therefore, the impugned penalty could not have been imposed upon him while adjudicating penalty upon the partnership firm. It was further contended that the respondent was neither a partner in the firm M/s. Emkay Fashions nor he had anything to do with the said firm. The contention in this regard raised by the respondent before the Appellate Tribunal was accepted and his appeal was allowed. Thereby, the order of the adjudicating authority to the extent it imposed penalty of Rs. 10,000/- upon the respondent stood modified. Aggrieved by that, the Department has filed the present appeal on the grounds mentioned in Grounds of Appeal at pages 8 to 12 of the paper book. ( 4 ) DURING arguments, learned counsel for the appellant could not show the nexus between the respondent and the firm M/s. Emkay Fashions justifying imposition of penalty upon the respondent in his individual capacity. The contention of the respondent that he was neither a partner of M/s. Emkay fashions nor he had anything to do with the said firm also goes unchallenged. ( 5 ) UNDER the circumstances, I have no hesitation in holding that the learned Appellate Tribunal below was absolutely right in allowing the appeal of the respondent. ( 6 ) I do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.