TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether failure to realise and repatriate export proceeds, in the absence of documentary proof of effective recovery steps, constituted contravention under section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 and justified the penalty imposed.
Analysis: Liability under section 18(2) arises where the exporter does, or omits to do, an act with the effect of securing delayed or incomplete receipt of export proceeds. Where non-realisation is shown to be due to circumstances beyond the exporter's ordinary control despite diligence and bona fides, contravention may not be established. Here, no documentary evidence was produced to show meaningful steps for recovery of the outstanding amount. No attempt was shown to pursue the foreign buyer through institutional or legal channels, and no application for write-off was made to the Reserve Bank. On those facts, the finding of the adjudicating authority could not be disturbed.
Conclusion: The alleged contravention was made out and the penalty was sustained; the appeal failed.
Final Conclusion: The order under challenge was affirmed and the appellant remained liable to deposit the penalty amount.
Ratio Decidendi: An exporter avoids contravention under section 18(2) only by showing bona fide, reasonable and demonstrable efforts to realise export proceeds; mere explanation for non-recovery without proof of effective steps is insufficient.
TaxTMI 
