https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431449 A director's resignation before the expiry of the prescribed period for realisation of export proceeds did not, by itself, defeat liability under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, where the complaint specifically alleged that he was in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. The statutory scheme treated expiry of the repatriation period as the outer limit and supported a rebuttable presumption of contravention, so the complaint disclosed a prima facie case against the petitioner at the threshold. On that basis, the High Court found no ground to invoke inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, as the allegations were neither absurd nor inherently improbable and quashing was declined. en-us Fri, 09 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2022 09:05:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431449 A director's resignation before the expiry of the prescribed period for realisation of export proceeds did not, by itself, defeat liability under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, where the complaint specifically alleged that he was in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. The statutory scheme treated expiry of the repatriation period as the outer limit and supported a rebuttable presumption of contravention, so the complaint disclosed a prima facie case against the petitioner at the threshold. On that basis, the High Court found no ground to invoke inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, as the allegations were neither absurd nor inherently improbable and quashing was declined. Case-Laws FEMA Fri, 09 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431449