https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753953 Receipt of Indian rupees from an NRE account funded with foreign exchange was treated as dealing in foreign exchange and fell within the mischief of Section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, so the contravention was upheld. Denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the summary adjudication because the person concerned could not be secured, and the finding was supported by bank records and the appellants' own statements, so the challenge failed. Acquittal in the criminal case did not require interference with the penalty order because adjudication and prosecution are independent and the tribunal had sufficient documentary material and admissions, so the penalty was sustained. en-us Wed, 29 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Jun 2024 11:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753953 Receipt of Indian rupees from an NRE account funded with foreign exchange was treated as dealing in foreign exchange and fell within the mischief of Section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, so the contravention was upheld. Denial of cross-examination did not vitiate the summary adjudication because the person concerned could not be secured, and the finding was supported by bank records and the appellants' own statements, so the challenge failed. Acquittal in the criminal case did not require interference with the penalty order because adjudication and prosecution are independent and the tribunal had sufficient documentary material and admissions, so the penalty was sustained. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 29 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753953