<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1987 (2) TMI 427 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101470</link>
    <description>Separate foreign exchange contraventions may be treated transaction-wise where the record shows distinct receipts and disbursements on different dates, even if they are described in a consolidated charge memo. Seized account books, the appellant&#039;s admissions, panch witness evidence, and corroborative documents were held sufficient to prove the breaches and to sustain the statutory burden on the appellant to explain the transactions and establish permission. The evidentiary objections did not displace that burden. The Court also noted that penalty discretion must be exercised judicially and reduced the aggregate penalty in view of the scale and circumstances of the transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:09:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138519" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (2) TMI 427 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101470</link>
      <description>Separate foreign exchange contraventions may be treated transaction-wise where the record shows distinct receipts and disbursements on different dates, even if they are described in a consolidated charge memo. Seized account books, the appellant&#039;s admissions, panch witness evidence, and corroborative documents were held sufficient to prove the breaches and to sustain the statutory burden on the appellant to explain the transactions and establish permission. The evidentiary objections did not displace that burden. The Court also noted that penalty discretion must be exercised judicially and reduced the aggregate penalty in view of the scale and circumstances of the transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101470</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>