https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288454 A penalty for contravention of section 9(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 could not rest solely on the appellant's confessional statement recorded under section 40. The record contained no independent evidence that the alleged amount had been received from a person resident outside India, and the statement was retracted. Consistently with Board and court decisions, guilt for such contravention requires corroboration from other material, especially where the confession is uncorroborated. The investigation also failed to produce material supporting the information that triggered it, and the adjudicating authority did not show why that information was reliable. The penalty was therefore unsustainable and the impugned order was set aside. en-us Mon, 23 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jun 2020 18:13:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288454 A penalty for contravention of section 9(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 could not rest solely on the appellant's confessional statement recorded under section 40. The record contained no independent evidence that the alleged amount had been received from a person resident outside India, and the statement was retracted. Consistently with Board and court decisions, guilt for such contravention requires corroboration from other material, especially where the confession is uncorroborated. The investigation also failed to produce material supporting the information that triggered it, and the adjudicating authority did not show why that information was reliable. The penalty was therefore unsustainable and the impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws FEMA Mon, 23 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288454