https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440853 The appeals FEA 5 of 2008, FEA 22 of 2009, and FEA 23 of 2009 were dismissed by the court, which found no merit in the appellants' arguments. The court upheld the actions of the adjudicating officer, concluding that the memorandum issued on May 31, 2002, complied with the time limits under Section 49 of FEMA. It affirmed the jurisdiction and authority of the adjudicating officer and found the appellants in violation of RBI guidelines by selling foreign currency to fake passengers. The court rejected the appellants' interpretation of Section 49 of FEMA, supporting the continuation of proceedings under FERA. en-us Tue, 25 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440853 The appeals FEA 5 of 2008, FEA 22 of 2009, and FEA 23 of 2009 were dismissed by the court, which found no merit in the appellants' arguments. The court upheld the actions of the adjudicating officer, concluding that the memorandum issued on May 31, 2002, complied with the time limits under Section 49 of FEMA. It affirmed the jurisdiction and authority of the adjudicating officer and found the appellants in violation of RBI guidelines by selling foreign currency to fake passengers. The court rejected the appellants' interpretation of Section 49 of FEMA, supporting the continuation of proceedings under FERA. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 25 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440853