https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110680 A prior opportunity to show that the required permission existed under the foreign exchange law need not be repeated immediately before prosecution if effective notice and hearing were already given during adjudication, so the complaint was not vitiated. Confessional statements made before enforcement officers were treated as admissible, and the retractions were rejected because they were unsupported by the custody record; corroboration from seized documents, currency and oral evidence, together with the statutory burden on the accused to disprove culpable mental state and establish permission, justified reversal of acquittals in the connected matters. Offences committed under the repealed foreign exchange statute remained punishable because the later enactment expressly saved past offences. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Apr 2012 11:34:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110680 A prior opportunity to show that the required permission existed under the foreign exchange law need not be repeated immediately before prosecution if effective notice and hearing were already given during adjudication, so the complaint was not vitiated. Confessional statements made before enforcement officers were treated as admissible, and the retractions were rejected because they were unsupported by the custody record; corroboration from seized documents, currency and oral evidence, together with the statutory burden on the accused to disprove culpable mental state and establish permission, justified reversal of acquittals in the connected matters. Offences committed under the repealed foreign exchange statute remained punishable because the later enactment expressly saved past offences. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 09 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110680