https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103045 In proceedings under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, inconsistent explanations about the source and ownership of seized currency, together with contemporaneous admissions and corroboration from the manager's statement, supported the finding that the amount was received on behalf of a person resident outside India otherwise than through an authorised dealer. The later retraction was found unconvincing, and the circular relied on by the appellant was treated as addressing a different context. On those facts, the confiscation of the currency and the penalty for contravention of section 9(1)(b) were upheld. en-us Fri, 19 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:20:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103045 In proceedings under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, inconsistent explanations about the source and ownership of seized currency, together with contemporaneous admissions and corroboration from the manager's statement, supported the finding that the amount was received on behalf of a person resident outside India otherwise than through an authorised dealer. The later retraction was found unconvincing, and the circular relied on by the appellant was treated as addressing a different context. On those facts, the confiscation of the currency and the penalty for contravention of section 9(1)(b) were upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 19 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103045