Coercive recovery during GST searches is restrained pending scrutiny, preserving normal business operations and requiring adherence to investigation g...
COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Page of 4894
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
721 to 740 of 97867 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involves contravention of Section 8(1) of FERA, 1973. The Appellate Tribunal held that the transfer of money from an NRE account, even if received in Indian currency, satisfies the requirements of Section 8(1). The denial of cross-examination of witnesses was deemed acceptable in quasi-judicial proceedings, especially when the witness was unavailable. The Tribunal found that the respondents proved their case through collected documents, rendering cross-examination unnecessary. The appellants' acquittal by the ACMM Court did not impact the Tribunal's decision, as the respondents provided sufficient evidence of the transfer from the NRE account. The Tribunal emphasized that the standards of proof in criminal and adjudication cases differ, and the failure of the prosecution case does not automatically lead to the failure of the adjudication case.
The case involves contravention of Section 8(1) of FERA, 1973. The Appellate Tribunal held that the transfer of money from an NRE account, even if received in Indian currency, satisfies the requirements of Section 8(1). The denial of cross-examination of witnesses was deemed acceptable in quasi-judicial proceedings, especially when the witness was unavailable. The Tribunal found that the respondents proved their case through collected documents, rendering cross-examination unnecessary. The appellants' acquittal by the ACMM Court did not impact the Tribunal's decision, as the respondents provided sufficient evidence of the transfer from the NRE account. The Tribunal emphasized that the standards of proof in criminal and adjudication cases differ, and the failure of the prosecution case does not automatically lead to the failure of the adjudication case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4894 
