Proportionality in company penalty quantification requires aggravating and mitigating factors; mechanical multiplication of director liability is impe...
The Appellate Tribunal found the Appellant Company guilty of contravening u/s 9(1)(a) of FERA 1973 by making payments to a person outside India without RBI permission. The company abetted in contravention of u/s 8(1) of FERA 1973. The Tribunal noted the company's actions facilitated the conversion of rupee accounts, disregarding statutory obligations. The Tribunal applied the presumption of culpable mental state u/s 59 of FERA 1973, shifting the burden to the Appellants, which they failed to rebut. The Tribunal upheld penalties for contraventions u/s 9(1)(a) and u/s 9(1)(c) against the Appellant Company and individual Appellants. Penalties for contraventions u/s 8(1) were set aside. Total penalties imposed were Rs. 32,00,000 on the Company and Rs. 8,00,000 on each individual Appellant, with adjustments for pre-deposits.
The Appellate Tribunal found the Appellant Company guilty of contravening u/s 9(1)(a) of FERA 1973 by making payments to a person outside India without RBI permission. The company abetted in contravention of u/s 8(1) of FERA 1973. The Tribunal noted the company's actions facilitated the conversion of rupee accounts, disregarding statutory obligations. The Tribunal applied the presumption of culpable mental state u/s 59 of FERA 1973, shifting the burden to the Appellants, which they failed to rebut. The Tribunal upheld penalties for contraventions u/s 9(1)(a) and u/s 9(1)(c) against the Appellant Company and individual Appellants. Penalties for contraventions u/s 8(1) were set aside. Total penalties imposed were Rs. 32,00,000 on the Company and Rs. 8,00,000 on each individual Appellant, with adjustments for pre-deposits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
