<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (4) TMI 464 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114053</link>
    <description>The court upheld the findings of the adjudicating authority and the Appellate Tribunal, confirming the penalty and confiscation imposed on the appellant. The appellant failed to discharge the burden of proof under Section 71(3) of FERA, and the retracted confessional statement, corroborated by independent evidence, was deemed admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2014 12:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151059" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 464 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114053</link>
      <description>The court upheld the findings of the adjudicating authority and the Appellate Tribunal, confirming the penalty and confiscation imposed on the appellant. The appellant failed to discharge the burden of proof under Section 71(3) of FERA, and the retracted confessional statement, corroborated by independent evidence, was deemed admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114053</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>