https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175113 A retracted statement was held reliable for proving contravention under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act because it contained transaction details, was belatedly withdrawn, and was corroborated in part by seized documents; the contravention finding under section 5(1)(c) was upheld. By contrast, the penalty under section 5(1)(aa) could not stand because the record did not clearly establish that the two instalments were received by order of or on behalf of a person outside India, and the requisite factual finding was unsupported by adequate material; that penalty was set aside. en-us Wed, 10 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Nov 2015 16:06:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175113 A retracted statement was held reliable for proving contravention under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act because it contained transaction details, was belatedly withdrawn, and was corroborated in part by seized documents; the contravention finding under section 5(1)(c) was upheld. By contrast, the penalty under section 5(1)(aa) could not stand because the record did not clearly establish that the two instalments were received by order of or on behalf of a person outside India, and the requisite factual finding was unsupported by adequate material; that penalty was set aside. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 10 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175113