<?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>2010 (12) TMI 1079 - THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158876</link>
    <description>Service of a show-cause notice at the last known address was treated as valid where the appellant had not informed the authorities of the change of address, and Rule 3 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Rules, 1974 was held to permit service by recognised modes beyond the registered office. The dispute also turned on whether foreign exchange obtained for imports was properly utilised, with the statutory burden under Section 71(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 resting on the appellant. In the interest of natural justice, the appellant was to be given one further opportunity to produce the bill of entry, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration, with costs imposed for failure to notify the address change.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2013 18:18:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335034" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 1079 - THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158876</link>
      <description>Service of a show-cause notice at the last known address was treated as valid where the appellant had not informed the authorities of the change of address, and Rule 3 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Rules, 1974 was held to permit service by recognised modes beyond the registered office. The dispute also turned on whether foreign exchange obtained for imports was properly utilised, with the statutory burden under Section 71(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 resting on the appellant. In the interest of natural justice, the appellant was to be given one further opportunity to produce the bill of entry, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration, with costs imposed for failure to notify the address change.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158876</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>