<?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 193 - ATFEMA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366457</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 30 lakhs imposed under Section 50 of erstwhile FERA, 1973. The decision was based on improper service of adjudicating order and show cause notices, failure to consider documentary evidence, initiation of proceedings beyond the limitation period, and the appellant&#039;s financial hardship. The appeal was allowed with no costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2018 08:27:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533195" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 193 - ATFEMA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366457</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty of Rs. 30 lakhs imposed under Section 50 of erstwhile FERA, 1973. The decision was based on improper service of adjudicating order and show cause notices, failure to consider documentary evidence, initiation of proceedings beyond the limitation period, and the appellant&#039;s financial hardship. The appeal was allowed with no costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366457</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>