Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
Whether RBI's permission for allotment of shares to a non-resident against import of second-hand capital goods was legally infirm, including on an alleged FERA violation, was the dominant issue. The court held that the investment involved direct payment by the non-resident for imported machinery, with no foreign-exchange outflow by the company, and was expressly permissible on a non-repatriable basis under the applicable government directive; hence RBI's approval was valid. It further held that FERA had been repealed prior to the approval and, under FEMA, no RBI permission was required for such allotment; the "sunset" contention therefore did not arise. The intra-court appeal was dismissed - HC
Whether RBI's permission for allotment of shares to a non-resident against import of second-hand capital goods was legally infirm, including on an alleged FERA violation, was the dominant issue. The court held that the investment involved direct payment by the non-resident for imported machinery, with no foreign-exchange outflow by the company, and was expressly permissible on a non-repatriable basis under the applicable government directive; hence RBI's approval was valid. It further held that FERA had been repealed prior to the approval and, under FEMA, no RBI permission was required for such allotment; the "sunset" contention therefore did not arise. The intra-court appeal was dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.