<?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>A retracted statement under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 may still be relied upon in adjudication if it is not shown to be involuntary and is corroborated by independent documentary and oral evidence. The court also held that a currency declaration form, by itself, does not conclusively explain later possession of foreign exchange where surrounding circumstances point the other way. Once possession of foreign exchange beyond the statutory limit is shown, section 71(3) places the burden on the person in possession to prove lawful acquisition. On the facts, the corroborated statement and supporting material were sufficient to sustain contravention, and lawful possession was not proved.</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>A retracted statement under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 may still be relied upon in adjudication if it is not shown to be involuntary and is corroborated by independent documentary and oral evidence. The court also held that a currency declaration form, by itself, does not conclusively explain later possession of foreign exchange where surrounding circumstances point the other way. Once possession of foreign exchange beyond the statutory limit is shown, section 71(3) places the burden on the person in possession to prove lawful acquisition. On the facts, the corroborated statement and supporting material were sufficient to sustain contravention, and lawful possession was not proved.</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>