<?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>2009 (1) TMI 922 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282299</link>
    <description>Before 31.07.1995, the Exchange Control Manuals did not clearly prohibit foreign currency deposits or credits into NRE accounts by persons other than the NRI account holder, including operations under a power of attorney confined to local payments. The circular dated 31.07.1995 introduced an express prospective regime for credits representing foreign currency, travellers cheques and bank notes, and required in-person tender by the account holder for such credits. The earlier order dated 19.04.2007 was maintained because the manuals and circular did not justify recall on the basis of the alleged communication gap, and the review challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2019 11:30:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=581973" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 922 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282299</link>
      <description>Before 31.07.1995, the Exchange Control Manuals did not clearly prohibit foreign currency deposits or credits into NRE accounts by persons other than the NRI account holder, including operations under a power of attorney confined to local payments. The circular dated 31.07.1995 introduced an express prospective regime for credits representing foreign currency, travellers cheques and bank notes, and required in-person tender by the account holder for such credits. The earlier order dated 19.04.2007 was maintained because the manuals and circular did not justify recall on the basis of the alleged communication gap, and the review challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>