Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
AT dismissed the appeal challenging enhancement of penalty under section 19(1), holding that the respondents were not the masterminds behind outward remittances and fabricated import documentation alleged to contravene section 3(b) and section 10(6) of FEMA read with Reg. 6(1) of the 2000 Regulations. The Tribunal accepted respondents' plea that remittances were effected at the instance of unidentified third parties who used respondents' bank accounts and that the enforcement agency failed to apprehend or effectively investigate those alleged principal wrongdoers. Given this, enhancement of penalty was unjustified. The appeal is dismissed as devoid of merit, without prejudice to the merits of respondents' pending cross-appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.