New LODR Fifth Amendment reshapes related party transaction rules, disclosure duties, and non-convertible security communication timelines under Sched...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
8841 to 8860 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
AT upheld the admissibility and evidentiary value of statements recorded u/s 40 FERA, despite subsequent retraction, holding that retraction alone does not establish involuntariness and noting sufficient independent and cogent corroborative evidence, including recovered documents, seized cash and corroborating statements. AT affirmed findings of contravention of Ss. 8(1), 8(2), 9(1)(f)(i) and 14 FERA, rejecting the appellant's challenge to the merits of the adjudication. However, considering the appellant's age and prior deposit of part of the penalty, AT exercised discretion to reduce the penalty to Rs. 9,00,000/-, directing adjustment of amounts already deposited/released. Appeal was thus partly allowed, limited to quantum of penalty.
AT upheld the admissibility and evidentiary value of statements recorded u/s 40 FERA, despite subsequent retraction, holding that retraction alone does not establish involuntariness and noting sufficient independent and cogent corroborative evidence, including recovered documents, seized cash and corroborating statements. AT affirmed findings of contravention of Ss. 8(1), 8(2), 9(1)(f)(i) and 14 FERA, rejecting the appellant's challenge to the merits of the adjudication. However, considering the appellant's age and prior deposit of part of the penalty, AT exercised discretion to reduce the penalty to Rs. 9,00,000/-, directing adjustment of amounts already deposited/released. Appeal was thus partly allowed, limited to quantum of penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
