https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104187 Section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 confined High Court interference to a substantial question of law, and concurrent factual findings on export-realisation issues did not by themselves justify review. The exporter was required to take all reasonable steps to realise export proceeds under section 18(2), and the Court treated prolonged inaction and lack of diligence as sufficient to sustain contravention on the facts. Amounts later realised and sums waived by the Reserve Bank of India could be deducted from the penalty exposure to that extent. en-us Fri, 18 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Feb 2012 11:55:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104187 Section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 confined High Court interference to a substantial question of law, and concurrent factual findings on export-realisation issues did not by themselves justify review. The exporter was required to take all reasonable steps to realise export proceeds under section 18(2), and the Court treated prolonged inaction and lack of diligence as sufficient to sustain contravention on the facts. Amounts later realised and sums waived by the Reserve Bank of India could be deducted from the penalty exposure to that extent. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 18 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104187