<?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>2014 (1) TMI 1173 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242958</link>
    <description>RBI permission to write off or set off unrealised export proceeds was conditional on surrender of proportionate export incentives and production of documentary proof. The exporters failed to show, with verified material, the exact incentives availed in respect of the relevant GR forms; unencashed cheques alone did not establish compliance. The burden of proving fulfilment of the condition remained on the exporters and did not shift to the opposing authority merely because it lacked the records. The Tribunal&#039;s approach of treating that burden as discharged was found erroneous, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration on the additional documents and further material.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2014 09:53:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343511" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 1173 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242958</link>
      <description>RBI permission to write off or set off unrealised export proceeds was conditional on surrender of proportionate export incentives and production of documentary proof. The exporters failed to show, with verified material, the exact incentives availed in respect of the relevant GR forms; unencashed cheques alone did not establish compliance. The burden of proving fulfilment of the condition remained on the exporters and did not shift to the opposing authority merely because it lacked the records. The Tribunal&#039;s approach of treating that burden as discharged was found erroneous, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration on the additional documents and further material.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>