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...
The AT upheld contraventions of the FEMA 1999 and related 2000 Regulations against the appellant company for unauthorized receipt of inward remittances characterized as FDI, which were credited to the EEFC account contrary to prescribed norms. The penalty on the company was substantially reduced from Rs. 230 crores to Rs. 80.50 crores due to disproportionality. Individual penalties imposed on former directors and signatories to grant agreements were moderated proportionately, with amounts scaled down and corresponding fixed deposits transferred to the respondent. The appeal of the employee appellant was allowed, exempting him from penalty on grounds of lack of independent responsibility and inapplicability of vicarious liability under Section 42. The decision balances enforcement of FEMA provisions with equitable penalty assessment reflecting each appellant's role and culpability.
The AT upheld contraventions of the FEMA 1999 and related 2000 Regulations against the appellant company for unauthorized receipt of inward remittances characterized as FDI, which were credited to the EEFC account contrary to prescribed norms. The penalty on the company was substantially reduced from Rs. 230 crores to Rs. 80.50 crores due to disproportionality. Individual penalties imposed on former directors and signatories to grant agreements were moderated proportionately, with amounts scaled down and corresponding fixed deposits transferred to the respondent. The appeal of the employee appellant was allowed, exempting him from penalty on grounds of lack of independent responsibility and inapplicability of vicarious liability under Section 42. The decision balances enforcement of FEMA provisions with equitable penalty assessment reflecting each appellant's role and culpability.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
