1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- 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.
<h1>Appeal under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act succeeds; insufficient evidence leads to refund of pre-deposits to appellants.</h1> The appeal under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, was allowed, and the impugned order against both appellants was set aside. The court found ... - Issues:1. Imposition of penalties under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.2. Joint appeal filed by two appellants.3. Delay in finalizing the appeal due to a connected case.4. Allegations of abetment and contravention under different sections.5. Submissions made by both parties during the hearing.6. Evaluation of findings and submissions by the Adjudicating Officer.7. Analysis of factual details and remittances received by the appellant.8. Decision on contravention charges and penalties imposed.The judgment involves an appeal against penalties imposed under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The appeal was filed jointly by two appellants, with a delay in finalizing it due to a connected case involving another individual. The allegations included abetment and contravention under different sections of the Act. The appellant's submissions during the hearing reiterated the contentions in the memoranda of appeal. The Adjudicating Officer's findings were considered, with arguments presented by both parties.Regarding the charge of abetment, it was found that the appellant's role in a transaction did not amount to abetment of contravention by another individual. The investigation failed to establish the appellant's guilt in the alleged contravention. The charge under a different section lacked proper investigation and evidence to sustain the finding of contravention against the appellant. The judgment concluded that the second appellant could not be held guilty, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order against both appellants.In summary, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside. The respondents were directed to refund the pre-deposit amounts to both appellants within a specified timeframe. The judgment thoroughly analyzed the charges, submissions, and findings to reach a decision on the contravention charges and penalties imposed under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
