https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159237 A retracted statement was not treated as sufficient by itself for penalty under foreign exchange law; it was upheld only because it was corroborated by seized documents, including bank deposit slips, and by the statutory presumption under Section 72 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The tribunal found the surrounding circumstances adequate to support the search and seizure material, and held that the violation of Section 9(1)(b) and Section 9(1)(d) was proved, so the penalty was sustained. en-us Fri, 14 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Nov 2013 17:40:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159237 A retracted statement was not treated as sufficient by itself for penalty under foreign exchange law; it was upheld only because it was corroborated by seized documents, including bank deposit slips, and by the statutory presumption under Section 72 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The tribunal found the surrounding circumstances adequate to support the search and seizure material, and held that the violation of Section 9(1)(b) and Section 9(1)(d) was proved, so the penalty was sustained. Case-Laws FEMA Fri, 14 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159237