https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112819 Penalty under FEMA and the 2000 Regulations could not be sustained for a purchase made before those provisions came into force, because Article 20(1) bars retrospective punishment and a later regulatory regime cannot create penal liability for an earlier transaction. The earlier FERA restriction applied only to non-citizens, while the purchaser was a citizen when the property was bought; the impugned action was therefore contrary to constitutional protection against ex post facto penal enforcement. The availability of an appellate remedy under FEMA did not bar writ relief where the proceedings themselves violated constitutional rights, and the High Court exercised writ jurisdiction, quashed the penalty order and corrigendum, and allowed the petition with costs. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Nov 2014 10:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112819 Penalty under FEMA and the 2000 Regulations could not be sustained for a purchase made before those provisions came into force, because Article 20(1) bars retrospective punishment and a later regulatory regime cannot create penal liability for an earlier transaction. The earlier FERA restriction applied only to non-citizens, while the purchaser was a citizen when the property was bought; the impugned action was therefore contrary to constitutional protection against ex post facto penal enforcement. The availability of an appellate remedy under FEMA did not bar writ relief where the proceedings themselves violated constitutional rights, and the High Court exercised writ jurisdiction, quashed the penalty order and corrigendum, and allowed the petition with costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112819