https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112595 Mere possession of foreign exchange is not enough to establish that a person has "otherwise acquired" it in contravention of FERA. On the facts, the appellant's contemporaneous statement, declaration form for US$ 82,000, and sworn affidavit consistently indicated that the currency belonged to another person and had been left in safe custody. In the absence of positive material showing the declaration was false, forged, or unreliable, the adverse findings were treated as perverse because they rested on conjecture rather than evidence. The statutory presumption of culpable mental state was rebutted, and contravention under section 8(1) was not proved. en-us Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Nov 2014 13:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112595 Mere possession of foreign exchange is not enough to establish that a person has "otherwise acquired" it in contravention of FERA. On the facts, the appellant's contemporaneous statement, declaration form for US$ 82,000, and sworn affidavit consistently indicated that the currency belonged to another person and had been left in safe custody. In the absence of positive material showing the declaration was false, forged, or unreliable, the adverse findings were treated as perverse because they rested on conjecture rather than evidence. The statutory presumption of culpable mental state was rebutted, and contravention under section 8(1) was not proved. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112595