Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Appellants acted in contravention of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1973 by transferring non-convertible amount out of India, making it convertible without RBI's permission. The contravention occurred not on one occasion but multiple times, indicating negligence. Bringing the amount back does not nullify the contravention. The Adjudicating Authority rightly imposed penalty after considering all aspects, though the quantum was disproportionate. The penalty is reduced to Rs. 30 lakhs for the appellant bank and Rs. 3 lakhs each for individual appellants. Any excess amount deposited shall be refunded. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the contravention but moderated the penalty considering it a case of negligence as per the High Court's observation.
Appellants acted in contravention of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1973 by transferring non-convertible amount out of India, making it convertible without RBI's permission. The contravention occurred not on one occasion but multiple times, indicating negligence. Bringing the amount back does not nullify the contravention. The Adjudicating Authority rightly imposed penalty after considering all aspects, though the quantum was disproportionate. The penalty is reduced to Rs. 30 lakhs for the appellant bank and Rs. 3 lakhs each for individual appellants. Any excess amount deposited shall be refunded. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the contravention but moderated the penalty considering it a case of negligence as per the High Court's observation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
