Appellate jurisdiction over baggage imports is excluded, requiring confiscation challenges involving passenger-carried gold to proceed by statutory re...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 97820 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 involved a violation of the FEMA Act due to accepting and placing bets on cricket matches for clients. The appellant was linked to the raided premises where incriminating evidence was found. The Appellate Tribunal found the appellant guilty based on evidence, including statements and financial transactions. Penalties were imposed u/s 4 of FEMA and u/s 3(d) of the Act of 1999. The Tribunal reduced the penalties to make them proportionate to the contraventions. The total penalty imposed on the appellant was Rs. 50 lakhs, with Rs. 10 lakhs for u/s 4 and Rs. 40 lakhs for u/s 3(d). The appeal was partly allowed based on the revised penalties.
The case involved a violation of the FEMA Act due to accepting and placing bets on cricket matches for clients. The appellant was linked to the raided premises where incriminating evidence was found. The Appellate Tribunal found the appellant guilty based on evidence, including statements and financial transactions. Penalties were imposed u/s 4 of FEMA and u/s 3(d) of the Act of 1999. The Tribunal reduced the penalties to make them proportionate to the contraventions. The total penalty imposed on the appellant was Rs. 50 lakhs, with Rs. 10 lakhs for u/s 4 and Rs. 40 lakhs for u/s 3(d). The appeal was partly allowed based on the revised penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
