Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Foreign-currency remittances for overseas tournament services...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained breaches.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Foreign-currency remittances for overseas tournament services were treated as current account transactions because they did not alter assets, liabilities or contingent liabilities; related findings concerning the dedicated foreign-currency account, service-expense reimbursements, pouring-rights revenue, EEFC credits and authorised dealer liability were set aside. Reimbursements to the service provider were not borrowing or lending absent a loan arrangement or interest. EEFC-account drawals generally did not require prior approval, but remittances exceeding the recorded contractual liability constituted a contravention. Delayed repatriation of ticket-sale proceeds also constituted a contravention, while liability of office-bearers depended on whether they were in charge of the organisation's affairs. The natural-justice objection failed because hearing and cross-examination opportunities were provided.
Foreign-currency remittances for overseas tournament services were treated as current account transactions because they did not alter assets, liabilities or contingent liabilities; related findings concerning the dedicated foreign-currency account, service-expense reimbursements, pouring-rights revenue, EEFC credits and authorised dealer liability were set aside. Reimbursements to the service provider were not borrowing or lending absent a loan arrangement or interest. EEFC-account drawals generally did not require prior approval, but remittances exceeding the recorded contractual liability constituted a contravention. Delayed repatriation of ticket-sale proceeds also constituted a contravention, while liability of office-bearers depended on whether they were in charge of the organisation's affairs. The natural-justice objection failed because hearing and cross-examination opportunities were provided.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.