https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360165 Penalty under FERA could not be sustained because the show cause notice did not allege, and the record did not prove, that the appellant made any payment to or for the credit of a person resident outside India or otherwise satisfied the ingredients of Section 9(1)(d). The adjudicating authority was bound by the allegations in the notice and could not travel beyond them to uphold contravention on a broader factual basis. As the appellant's role was confined to acting as a broker or intermediary and the principal transaction-holder had already been exonerated, the penalty order was set aside and the impugned adjudication quashed. en-us Wed, 02 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 May 2018 08:24:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360165 Penalty under FERA could not be sustained because the show cause notice did not allege, and the record did not prove, that the appellant made any payment to or for the credit of a person resident outside India or otherwise satisfied the ingredients of Section 9(1)(d). The adjudicating authority was bound by the allegations in the notice and could not travel beyond them to uphold contravention on a broader factual basis. As the appellant's role was confined to acting as a broker or intermediary and the principal transaction-holder had already been exonerated, the penalty order was set aside and the impugned adjudication quashed. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 02 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360165