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...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
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.