Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the finding that the appellant contravened Section 3(a) of FEMA in relation to unauthorised foreign exchange dealing, relying on corroborative statements, recovery of US $ 10,000 from the appellant's personal custody, and the absence of a credible explanation for possession of the currency. The plea based on educational background was rejected because the persons involved had prior money-changing experience and were expected to know the legal requirements. Liability for penalty was therefore sustained, but the Tribunal reduced the quantum of penalty in view of the facts and circumstances and directed adjustment of the pre-deposit against the reduced amount.
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the finding that the appellant contravened Section 3(a) of FEMA in relation to unauthorised foreign exchange dealing, relying on corroborative statements, recovery of US $ 10,000 from the appellant's personal custody, and the absence of a credible explanation for possession of the currency. The plea based on educational background was rejected because the persons involved had prior money-changing experience and were expected to know the legal requirements. Liability for penalty was therefore sustained, but the Tribunal reduced the quantum of penalty in view of the facts and circumstances and directed adjustment of the pre-deposit against the reduced amount.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.