https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215729 Section 11(2) of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 fastens fiscal penalty only where the person concerned made, abetted, or attempted the prohibited export or import. The Bombay HC text notes that no allegation or finding showed any personal role by the nominee director in obtaining licences, importing raw materials, executing undertakings, or dealing with the goods, and mere status as nominee director was insufficient. On that reasoning, penalty could not be sustained without a recorded finding of abetment or other legally relevant involvement in the contravention. en-us Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Aug 2012 11:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215729 Section 11(2) of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 fastens fiscal penalty only where the person concerned made, abetted, or attempted the prohibited export or import. The Bombay HC text notes that no allegation or finding showed any personal role by the nominee director in obtaining licences, importing raw materials, executing undertakings, or dealing with the goods, and mere status as nominee director was insufficient. On that reasoning, penalty could not be sustained without a recorded finding of abetment or other legally relevant involvement in the contravention. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215729