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...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC affirmed that proceedings under FERA are adjudicatory rather than criminal in nature. While the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, acting as a quasi-judicial body, has authority to impose penalties for FERA violations, it lacks jurisdiction to pronounce parties "guilty" of offenses. Such determinations of guilt remain exclusively within the purview of competent courts. The tribunal's penalty against appellants was upheld, but the term "guilty" in the 02.06.2016 order was deemed redacted, as pronouncements of guilt carry significant legal implications that exceed the tribunal's administrative and adjudicatory scope.
HC affirmed that proceedings under FERA are adjudicatory rather than criminal in nature. While the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange, acting as a quasi-judicial body, has authority to impose penalties for FERA violations, it lacks jurisdiction to pronounce parties "guilty" of offenses. Such determinations of guilt remain exclusively within the purview of competent courts. The tribunal's penalty against appellants was upheld, but the term "guilty" in the 02.06.2016 order was deemed redacted, as pronouncements of guilt carry significant legal implications that exceed the tribunal's administrative and adjudicatory scope.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.