https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756961 In adjudication under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, documents obtained under Income-tax proceedings were treated as admissible under Section 72, with authenticity and contents capable of presumptive reliance; the proceedings were civil in nature and governed by preponderance of probability, so denial of cross-examination did not, by itself, vitiate the order. The tribunal also treated an inward remittance of foreign currency, unsupported by a valid investment route, RBI permission, or credible documentation, as a prohibited transaction and upheld director liability where the company received and handled the funds. An unexplained foreign receipt from a non-existent source was likewise treated as contravention of Section 8(1), with connected confiscation sustaining on the same basis. en-us Wed, 24 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2024 16:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756961 In adjudication under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, documents obtained under Income-tax proceedings were treated as admissible under Section 72, with authenticity and contents capable of presumptive reliance; the proceedings were civil in nature and governed by preponderance of probability, so denial of cross-examination did not, by itself, vitiate the order. The tribunal also treated an inward remittance of foreign currency, unsupported by a valid investment route, RBI permission, or credible documentation, as a prohibited transaction and upheld director liability where the company received and handled the funds. An unexplained foreign receipt from a non-existent source was likewise treated as contravention of Section 8(1), with connected confiscation sustaining on the same basis. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 24 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756961