Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
FERA penalty quantification must be reasoned, reasonable and proportionate to the contravention; the statutory maximum under Section 50 does not by itself justify the amount imposed. Where certain export-realisation contraventions were excluded and an RBI write-off was noted, retaining the original penalty without explaining its basis was disproportionate. A finding that the penalty was not harsh or excessive, without articulated quantification reasons, was insufficient. The penalty was therefore set aside and redetermined at a lower amount, with the appeal partly allowed.
FERA penalty quantification must be reasoned, reasonable and proportionate to the contravention; the statutory maximum under Section 50 does not by itself justify the amount imposed. Where certain export-realisation contraventions were excluded and an RBI write-off was noted, retaining the original penalty without explaining its basis was disproportionate. A finding that the penalty was not harsh or excessive, without articulated quantification reasons, was insufficient. The penalty was therefore set aside and redetermined at a lower amount, with the appeal partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
