<?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>2018 (9) TMI 192 - ATFEMA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366456</link>
    <description>The appeal challenged penalties imposed on the appellants for violating Section 16(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, related to non-realization of funds from M/s. EEE. The Tribunal found lack of independent evidence supporting the charges and inconsistencies in the complainant&#039;s statements. Due to insufficient evidence and doubts raised, the Impugned Order was set aside, emphasizing the necessity of concrete evidence in such cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2018 08:26:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533194" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 192 - ATFEMA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366456</link>
      <description>The appeal challenged penalties imposed on the appellants for violating Section 16(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, related to non-realization of funds from M/s. EEE. The Tribunal found lack of independent evidence supporting the charges and inconsistencies in the complainant&#039;s statements. Due to insufficient evidence and doubts raised, the Impugned Order was set aside, emphasizing the necessity of concrete evidence in such cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366456</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>