Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Contravention of the NRNR account regulations attracted penalty against both the authorised dealer and the account holders, because the scheme required the account to be opened only by a non-resident person from funds remitted from outside India, and Section 13(1) of FEMA applied to any person who contravened the Act or regulations. The later omission of Regulation 5(1)(iv) did not extinguish liabilities already incurred, since repeal by omission does not erase prior violations absent contrary intent, so the challenge to the show cause notices failed. Confiscation, however, was set aside because the adjudicating authority and tribunal gave no reasons for ordering it, despite the discretionary nature of Section 13(2) and the repayment of the loan through maturity proceeds.
Contravention of the NRNR account regulations attracted penalty against both the authorised dealer and the account holders, because the scheme required the account to be opened only by a non-resident person from funds remitted from outside India, and Section 13(1) of FEMA applied to any person who contravened the Act or regulations. The later omission of Regulation 5(1)(iv) did not extinguish liabilities already incurred, since repeal by omission does not erase prior violations absent contrary intent, so the challenge to the show cause notices failed. Confiscation, however, was set aside because the adjudicating authority and tribunal gave no reasons for ordering it, despite the discretionary nature of Section 13(2) and the repayment of the loan through maturity proceeds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.