<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (9) TMI 1089 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457385</link>
    <description>Liability for failure to repatriate export proceeds under FERA section 18 attaches to the exporter who files the undertaking or is otherwise entitled to receive the sale proceeds, and the section 18(3) presumption applies only against that person; where shipping documents, export code, invoices, and export benefits stood in MMTC Ltd.&#039;s name, manufacturers acting under its arrangement were not treated as the statutory exporter. The note also states that alleged foreign exchange liability under section 8(1) requires proof of real acquisition or transfer with beneficial interest, not mere conduit possession, and that the enforcement burden remains on the department. On these principles, the penalties were held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2024 15:35:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=768946" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 1089 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FOREIGN EXCHANGE, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457385</link>
      <description>Liability for failure to repatriate export proceeds under FERA section 18 attaches to the exporter who files the undertaking or is otherwise entitled to receive the sale proceeds, and the section 18(3) presumption applies only against that person; where shipping documents, export code, invoices, and export benefits stood in MMTC Ltd.&#039;s name, manufacturers acting under its arrangement were not treated as the statutory exporter. The note also states that alleged foreign exchange liability under section 8(1) requires proof of real acquisition or transfer with beneficial interest, not mere conduit possession, and that the enforcement burden remains on the department. On these principles, the penalties were held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457385</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>