https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95817 Section 10 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 was construed as a whole, so penal action could not rest on isolated failure under sub-section (1) without non-compliance with a Reserve Bank direction under sub-section (2). Where repatriation was made after RBI directions, the proposed penalty was unsustainable because the statutory direction had been complied with. The Court also treated the proceeding as penal in nature, requiring strict construction, and noted that absence of mens rea and prior lawful conduct under an accepted remittance policy supported quashing the memorandum and adjudication. en-us Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 16:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95817 Section 10 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 was construed as a whole, so penal action could not rest on isolated failure under sub-section (1) without non-compliance with a Reserve Bank direction under sub-section (2). Where repatriation was made after RBI directions, the proposed penalty was unsustainable because the statutory direction had been complied with. The Court also treated the proceeding as penal in nature, requiring strict construction, and noted that absence of mens rea and prior lawful conduct under an accepted remittance policy supported quashing the memorandum and adjudication. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95817