Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The AT found the appellant's bank contravened FEMA provisions by allowing outward remittance without RBI approval, specifically violating Sections 6(3)(b), 10(5), and 47(3). The DCF valuation method revealed irregular share pricing and improper transaction documentation. While other noticees faced penalties ranging from Rs. 4-85 crores, the AT determined the initial Rs. 14 crores penalty against the appellant bank was disproportionate. Consequently, the AT reduced the penalty to Rs. 1.4 crores, noting the bank's limited direct culpability while acknowledging procedural irregularities in the remittance process. The appeal was partially allowed with the penalty modification.
The AT found the appellant's bank contravened FEMA provisions by allowing outward remittance without RBI approval, specifically violating Sections 6(3)(b), 10(5), and 47(3). The DCF valuation method revealed irregular share pricing and improper transaction documentation. While other noticees faced penalties ranging from Rs. 4-85 crores, the AT determined the initial Rs. 14 crores penalty against the appellant bank was disproportionate. Consequently, the AT reduced the penalty to Rs. 1.4 crores, noting the bank's limited direct culpability while acknowledging procedural irregularities in the remittance process. The appeal was partially allowed with the penalty modification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
