https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190244 A statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act could not be treated as substantive incriminating evidence in foreign exchange proceedings under the FERA because it was made for customs purposes and did not amount to an admission of under-invoicing or contravention. The seized documents were also held insufficient, because they were not properly proved or authenticated and lacked independent corroboration. In the absence of admissible evidence, the enforcement authority could not shift the burden to the appellant or draw an adverse inference. The contravention findings and penalties were therefore unsustainable. en-us Tue, 29 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Feb 2017 22:57:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190244 A statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act could not be treated as substantive incriminating evidence in foreign exchange proceedings under the FERA because it was made for customs purposes and did not amount to an admission of under-invoicing or contravention. The seized documents were also held insufficient, because they were not properly proved or authenticated and lacked independent corroboration. In the absence of admissible evidence, the enforcement authority could not shift the burden to the appellant or draw an adverse inference. The contravention findings and penalties were therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 29 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190244