https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758265 In adjudication under SAFEMA, inadequate proof of effective service and a hearing conducted ex parte without proper verification of the company's current address were treated as procedural unfairness affecting the penalty order. The record also showed that import proof was available for a substantial part of the foreign exchange remittances, leaving only limited remittances unsupported. On that basis, the alleged contravention was considered overstated and the penalty was reduced as disproportionate rather than maintained in its original quantum. The matter illustrates that where the evidentiary breach is limited and procedural fairness is deficient, penalty relief may be granted on proportionality grounds. en-us Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Sep 2024 09:06:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758265 In adjudication under SAFEMA, inadequate proof of effective service and a hearing conducted ex parte without proper verification of the company's current address were treated as procedural unfairness affecting the penalty order. The record also showed that import proof was available for a substantial part of the foreign exchange remittances, leaving only limited remittances unsupported. On that basis, the alleged contravention was considered overstated and the penalty was reduced as disproportionate rather than maintained in its original quantum. The matter illustrates that where the evidentiary breach is limited and procedural fairness is deficient, penalty relief may be granted on proportionality grounds. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 09 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758265