<?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>2012 (5) TMI 387 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213536</link>
    <description>Leave to appeal against acquittal was declined where the alleged wilful disobedience of summons under foreign exchange law was not established. Liability required proper service and a deliberate refusal to comply, but the record showed no personal service on the respondent and service on counsel only shortly before the scheduled appearance. The short interval, together with the respondent&#039;s custody status or recent release, made same-day attendance unrealistic. The surrounding circumstances also did not show an intention to obstruct investigation, so no illegality or infirmity justified interference with the acquittal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 18:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186937" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 387 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213536</link>
      <description>Leave to appeal against acquittal was declined where the alleged wilful disobedience of summons under foreign exchange law was not established. Liability required proper service and a deliberate refusal to comply, but the record showed no personal service on the respondent and service on counsel only shortly before the scheduled appearance. The short interval, together with the respondent&#039;s custody status or recent release, made same-day attendance unrealistic. The surrounding circumstances also did not show an intention to obstruct investigation, so no illegality or infirmity justified interference with the acquittal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213536</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>