https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159239 In foreign exchange adjudication, denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the penalty proceedings because the appellants had admitted receipt of the cheque amounts, were given personal hearing notices, and did not avail the opportunity or insist on cross-examination, amounting to waiver. The tribunal also held that receipt of cheque amounts without general or special RBI permission, coupled with no satisfactory explanation for the payer-recipient relationship, could be proved on preponderance of probabilities. Mens rea was not essential for penalty under the civil liability standard, so the contravention was established and the penalty maintained. en-us Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Nov 2013 17:40:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159239 In foreign exchange adjudication, denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the penalty proceedings because the appellants had admitted receipt of the cheque amounts, were given personal hearing notices, and did not avail the opportunity or insist on cross-examination, amounting to waiver. The tribunal also held that receipt of cheque amounts without general or special RBI permission, coupled with no satisfactory explanation for the payer-recipient relationship, could be proved on preponderance of probabilities. Mens rea was not essential for penalty under the civil liability standard, so the contravention was established and the penalty maintained. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159239