Skip to content
GK24
Prime
Indian PolityMediumAsked in: CDS · CDS-II 2021, GK

Which one of the following is not correct in respect of Directorate of Enforcement ?

  1. A.It is a specialized financial investigation agency under the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance.
  2. B.It enforces the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999.
  3. C.It enforces the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
  4. D.It enforces the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988.

Correct answer

D. It enforces the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988.

Explanation

The correct answer is D, It enforces the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988. This statement is wrong: the Benami law is enforced by the Income Tax Department, not the ED.

The Directorate of Enforcement, set up in 1956, is a specialised financial investigation agency under the Department of Revenue in the Ministry of Finance, with its headquarters in New Delhi. It enforces the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (civil cases of foreign exchange violations), the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (criminal cases, where it can attach property and arrest), and the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. Benami cases are handled by the Initiating Officers and Approving Authorities of the Income Tax Department under the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

A is wrong to choose because the ED is indeed under the Department of Revenue. B is wrong to choose because enforcing FEMA is one of its main tasks. C is wrong to choose because PMLA is the chief law it enforces.

Exam tip: ED = FEMA, PMLA, Fugitive Economic Offenders Act; Benami Act = Income Tax Department (CBDT).

Practice Questions

View all
Q2.Indian PolityAsked in: CDS · CDS-II 2021, GKEasy

The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression. But the freedom is subject to certain reasonable restrictions imposed by the State. These restrictions may relate to which of the following ?

1. Defamation

2. Decency or morality

3. Incitement to an offence

Select the correct answer using the code given below :

  1. A.1 only
  2. B.2 and 3 only
  3. C.1 and 3 only
  4. D.1, 2 and 3
Show answer
Correct answer: D. 1, 2 and 3

All three are grounds listed in Article 19(2) on which the State may place reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech and expression.

Q3.Indian PolityAsked in: NDA · NDA-I 2022, GATMedium

Which one of the following is not a Constitutional Commission of India?

  1. A.The National Commission for Scheduled Castes
  2. B.The National Commission for Scheduled Tribes
  3. C.The National Commission for Backward Classes
  4. D.The National Commission for Women
Show answer
Correct answer: D. The National Commission for Women

It was set up in 1992 under the National Commission for Women Act, 1990, so it is a statutory body, not a constitutional one.

Q4.Indian PolityMedium

Which statement about the doctrine of eclipse is correct?

  1. A.It applies equally to pre-Constitution and post-Constitution laws that violate Fundamental Rights
  2. B.It applies to pre-Constitution laws, which remain dormant and may revive if the constitutional bar is removed
  3. C.It permits a court to strike down only the offending part of a statute
  4. D.It allows a citizen to give up a Fundamental Right voluntarily
Show answer
Correct answer: B. It applies to pre-Constitution laws, which remain dormant and may revive if the constitutional bar is removed

Article 13(1) makes a pre-Constitution law void only to the extent of its inconsistency with the Fundamental Rights, so the Supreme Court in Bhikaji Narain Dhakras, 1955, held that such a law is not erased but merely eclipsed, staying unenforceable until the shadow is lifted, after which it revives.

Q5.Indian PolityHard

The doctrine of prospective overruling was applied for the first time in India in which case?

  1. A.I. C. Golaknath versus State of Punjab, 1967
  2. B.Maneka Gandhi versus Union of India, 1978
  3. C.Indira Sawhney versus Union of India, 1992
  4. D.S. R. Bommai versus Union of India, 1994
Show answer
Correct answer: A. I. C. Golaknath versus State of Punjab, 1967

An eleven judge bench held by six to five that Parliament cannot abridge Fundamental Rights by amendment, but the Court did not want to unsettle the land reform amendments already acted upon, so it declared that its ruling would operate only for the future.